Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MIROVNI INSTITUT v. SLOVENIA

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  MIROVNI INSTITUT v. SLOVENIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14 MRK
  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13
• EGMR, 09.01.2019 - 32303/13

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (15)

• EGMR, 24.04.2003 - 44962/98

  YVON c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  There are accordingly no grounds for making any award under that head (see, mutatis mutandis, Yvon v. France, no. 44962/98, § 44, ECHR 2003-V).
• EGMR, 08.02.2005 - 55853/00

  MILLER v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  This does not mean that refusing to hold an oral hearing may be justified only in rare cases (see Miller v. Sweden, no. 55853/00, § 29, 8 February 2005).
• EGMR, 08.03.2006 - 59532/00

  BLECIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  However, since this is a matter which goes to the Court's jurisdiction, the Court may examine it of its own motion (see Blecic v. Croatia [GC], no. 59532/00, § 67, ECHR 2006 III).

 
• EGMR, 23.02.2017 - 43395/09

  DE TOMMASO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  In this connection, it is to be recalled that there has been a shift in Court's case-law towards applying the civil limb of Article 6 to cases which might not initially appear to concern a civil right but which may have direct and significant repercussions on a private right belonging to an individual (see De Tommaso v. Italy [GC], no. 43395/09, § 151, ECHR 2017 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 11.07.2000 - 36308/97

  MARTI AG AND OTHERS v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  It is true that in some decisions, adopted before the Regner judgment, the Court had excluded the applicability of Article 6 to procedures concerning a call for tenders by the domestic authorities, pointing out that the latter enjoyed a discretionary power and that the substantive law of the State concerned did not confer to the applicants a right to be awarded the tender (see, in particular, Marti AG and Others v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 36308/97, ECHR 2000 VIII; SKYRADIO AG and Others v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 46841/99, 31 August 2004; I.T.C. LTD v. Malta (dec.), no. 2629/06, 11 December 2007; and S.C. Black Sea Caviar S.R.L. v. Romania (dec.) [Committee], no. 13013/06, 31 May 2016).
• EGMR, 09.12.1994 - 18064/91

  HIRO BALANI v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  It is also difficult for the Court to draw any conclusions as to which legal provision was regarded by the Administrative Court to form a legal basis for not holding a hearing and how this legal provision was interpreted against the factual background of the case (see, mutatis mutandis, Hiro Balani v. Spain, 9 December 1994, § 28, Series A no. 303-B, and Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, § 45, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 09.06.2016 - 44164/14

  Pharma-Erbe siegt vor EGMR: LG Dresden hat Recht auf faires Verfahren verletzt

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  The exceptional character of the circumstances that may justify dispensing with an oral hearing in proceedings concerning a "civil" right essentially comes down to the nature of the issues to be decided by the competent national court, not to the frequency of such situations (see Madaus v. Germany, no. 44164/14, § 23, 9 June 2016, and also Jussila v. Finland [GC], no. 73053/01, § 42, ECHR 2006-XIV, which concerned the criminal limb of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention).
• EGMR, 25.04.2002 - 64336/01

  VARELA ASSALINO contre le PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  The Court has accepted exceptional circumstances in cases where the proceedings concerned exclusively legal or highly technical questions (see Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, § 58, Series A no. 263; Varela Assalino v. Portugal (dec.), no. 64336/01, 25 April 2002; and Speil v. Austria (dec.), no. 42057/98, 5 September 2002).
• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

  CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  Having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties and its above finding under Article 6, the Court considers that it has examined the main legal questions raised in the present application and that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the remaining complaints (see, among other authorities, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014 and Kamil Uzun v. Turkey, no. 37410/97, § 64, 10 May 2007).
• EGMR, 11.12.2007 - 2629/06

  I.T.C. LTD v. MALTA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2018 - 32303/13

  It is true that in some decisions, adopted before the Regner judgment, the Court had excluded the applicability of Article 6 to procedures concerning a call for tenders by the domestic authorities, pointing out that the latter enjoyed a discretionary power and that the substantive law of the State concerned did not confer to the applicants a right to be awarded the tender (see, in particular, Marti AG and Others v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 36308/97, ECHR 2000 VIII; SKYRADIO AG and Others v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 46841/99, 31 August 2004; I.T.C. LTD v. Malta (dec.), no. 2629/06, 11 December 2007; and S.C. Black Sea Caviar S.R.L. v. Romania (dec.) [Committee], no. 13013/06, 31 May 2016).
• EGMR, 31.05.2016 - 13013/06

  S.C. BLACK SEA CAVIAR S.R.L. v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89

  SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE
• EGMR, 05.09.2002 - 42057/98

  SPEIL v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 10.05.2007 - 37410/97

  KAMIL UZUN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 28.02.2012 - 5488/05

  SIMSEK c. TURQUIE