Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DIMITROVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  DIMITROVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 01.03.2010 - 3843/02

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04 and 21819/04, § 69, ECHR 2010; and also Vuckovic and Others, cited above, § 70).
• EGMR, 01.03.2010 - 46113/99

  Demopoulos ./. Türkei und 7 andere

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04 and 21819/04, § 69, ECHR 2010; and also Vuckovic and Others, cited above, § 70).
• EGMR - 10200/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04 and 21819/04, § 69, ECHR 2010; and also Vuckovic and Others, cited above, § 70).

 
• EGMR - 19993/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04 and 21819/04, § 69, ECHR 2010; and also Vuckovic and Others, cited above, § 70).
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  Article 35 § 1 also requires that the complaints intended to be made subsequently in Strasbourg should have been made to the appropriate domestic body, at least in substance (see Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, §§ 144 and 146, ECHR 2010; and Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 37, ECHR 1999-I) and in compliance with the formal requirements and time-limits laid down in domestic law and, further, that any procedural means that might prevent a breach of the Convention should have been used (see Akdivar and Others v. Turkey, 16 September 1996, § 66, Reports 1996-IV).
• EGMR, 30.06.2005 - 45036/98

  Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi ./. Irland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  The Court sees no reason to disagree with or call into question the analysis or conclusions of the domestic courts, noting that the latter are better placed to interpret and apply relevant national legislation and domestic procedural rules to complaints made before them (see Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi v. Ireland [GC], no. 45036/98, § 143, ECHR 2005-VI).
• EGMR - 14163/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04 and 21819/04, § 69, ECHR 2010; and also Vuckovic and Others, cited above, § 70).
• EGMR - 13466/03

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04 and 21819/04, § 69, ECHR 2010; and also Vuckovic and Others, cited above, § 70).
• EGMR - 21819/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 39084/10

  46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04 and 21819/04, § 69, ECHR 2010; and also Vuckovic and Others, cited above, § 70).

• EGMR, 30.01.2024 - 53050/21

  ZLATANOV v. BULGARIA

  In such situations it is for the national courts to avail themselves of their powers of interpretation to address directly the impugned state of affairs and provide appropriate redress (see, mutatis mutandis, Dimitrova and Others v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 39084/10, § 74 in fine, 11 July 2017).