Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LASKOWSKA v. POLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01
• EGMR, 26.09.2013 - 77765/01

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EGMR, 09.10.1979 - 6289/73

  AIREY v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  In this context, the means employed by the State to ensure effective access to civil courts fell within its margin of appreciation (Airey v. Ireland, judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32, § 26).

  Failure to provide an applicant with the assistance of a lawyer may breach this provision where such assistance is indispensable for effective access to court, either because legal representation is rendered compulsory as is the case in certain Contracting States for various types of litigation, or by reason of the complexity of the procedure or the type of case (see Airey v. Ireland, judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32, pp. 14-16, §§ 26-28, where the applicant was unable to obtain the assistance of a lawyer in judicial separation proceedings).

• EGMR, 23.02.1999 - 41400/98

  MONFORTE SANCHO, GARCIA MORENO, ROIG ESPERT, ROIG ESPERT ET ICARDO GARCIA contre …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  38366/97, 38688/97, 40777/98, 40843/98, 41015/98, 41400/98, 41446/98, 41484/98, 41787/98 and 41509/98, §§ 33 and 36, ECHR 2000-I and Beles and Others v. the Czech Republic, no. 47273/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 11.01.2001 - 38460/97

  PLATAKOU v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  Accordingly, the Court finds that the applicant was deprived of the effective access to the Supreme Court on account of the flawed interpretation of domestic law by the Regional Court (see, mutatis mutandis, Leoni v. Italy, no. 43269/98, §§ 24-27, 26 October 2000 and Platakou v. Greece, no. 38460/97, §§ 39 and 44, ECHR 2001-I).

 
• EGMR, 07.05.2002 - 46311/99

  McVICAR v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  However, as the Airey case itself made clear (pp. 12-16, §§ 24 and 26), Article 6 § 1 leaves to the State a free choice of the means to be used in guaranteeing litigants a right of effective access to a court (McVicar v. the United Kingdom, no. 46311/99, § 45, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 16.07.2002 - 56547/00

  P., C. ET S. c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  Nonetheless, Article 6 may be engaged under two interrelated aspects (see, P., C. and S. v. the United Kingdom, no. 56547/00, § 88, ECHR 2002-VI).
• EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 47273/99

  BELES AND OTHERS v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  38366/97, 38688/97, 40777/98, 40843/98, 41015/98, 41400/98, 41446/98, 41484/98, 41787/98 and 41509/98, §§ 33 and 36, ECHR 2000-I and Beles and Others v. the Czech Republic, no. 47273/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01

  STEEL ET MORRIS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  It may therefore be acceptable to impose conditions on the granting of legal aid based, inter alia, on the financial situation of the litigant or his or her prospects of success in the proceedings (Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 62, ECHR 2005-II).
• EGMR, 27.06.2006 - 12825/02

  TABOR v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  The Court recalls that there is a clear distinction between the wording of Article 6 § 3 (c), which guarantees the right to free legal assistance on certain conditions in criminal proceedings, and of Article 6 § 1, which makes no reference to legal assistance (Del Sol v. France, no. 46800/99, § 20, ECHR 2002-II; Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, § 39, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  Firstly, Article 6 § 1 of the Convention embodies the right of access to a court for the determination of civil rights and obligations (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18, p. 18, § 36).
• EGMR, 27.10.1993 - 14448/88

  DOMBO BEHEER B.V. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  The Government submitted that the requirements of fairness were not necessarily the same in civil and criminal cases (Dombo Beheer B.V. v. the Netherlands, judgment of 27 October 1993, Series A no. 274, § 32).
• EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78

  ASHINGDANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 26.02.2002 - 46800/99

  DEL SOL c. FRANCE