Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  WALSTON v. NORWAY

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Partly admissible Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 11.12.2001 - 37372/97
• EGMR, 03.06.2003 - 37372/97

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 21.12.2000 - 33958/96

  WETTSTEIN v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2001 - 37372/97

  The existence of impartiality for the purposes of Article 6 § 1 must be determined solely according to the principles laid down in the Court's case-law, namely according to a subjective test, that is on the basis of the personal conviction of a particular judge in a given case, and also according to an objective test, that is ascertaining whether the judge offered guarantees sufficient to exclude any legitimate doubt in this respect (see Wettstein v. Switzerland, no. 33958/96, § 42, ECHR 2000-XII [21.12.00]).
• EGMR, 01.10.1982 - 8692/79

  PIERSACK v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2001 - 37372/97

  The Court further finds it significant that he had not occupied a senior position in the Bank but, as a legal officer, had worked there for a relatively short period - 2½ years - and had had no prior involvement with or knowledge of the applicants" loan agreement or any dealings with the persons concerned by this agreement (cf. the Piersack v. Belgium judgment 1 October 1982, Series A no. 53, §§ 30-31).
• EGMR, 24.02.1994 - 12547/86

  BENDENOUN c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2001 - 37372/97

  The Court does not find it established that there were any documents in the case-file produced before the High Court, on which the opposing party relied, that were not in the applicants" possession (see, mutatis mutandis, the Bendenoun v. France, judgment of 24 February 1994, Series A no. 284, § 52).

• EGMR, 23.11.2004 - 54857/00

  PUOLITAIVAL AND PIRTTIAHO v. FINLAND

  They relied on the Court's inadmissibility decision in Walston v. Norway ((dec.), no. 37372/97, 11 December 2001), maintaining that the time-frame could be relevant when assessing the significance of a judge's previous relationship to the opposing party.

  The present case may be distinguished from Walston v. Norway (no. 37372/97, decision of 11 December 2001), in which a judge had been employed several years previously by a bank that was a party to the proceedings in issue.