Auszug aus EGMR, 13.05.2003 - 39753/98

Moreover, while Article 6 of the Convention guarantees the right to a fair hearing, it does not lay down any rules on the admissibility of evidence or the way it should be assessed, which are therefore primarily matters for regulation by national law and the national courts (see the Schenk v. Switzerland judgment of 12 July 1988, Series A no. 140, p. 29, §§ 45-46 and García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 27, ECHR 1999-I).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.05.2003 - 39753/98

Moreover, while Article 6 of the Convention guarantees the right to a fair hearing, it does not lay down any rules on the admissibility of evidence or the way it should be assessed, which are therefore primarily matters for regulation by national law and the national courts (see the Schenk v. Switzerland judgment of 12 July 1988, Series A no. 140, p. 29, §§ 45-46 and García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 27, ECHR 1999-I).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.05.2003 - 39753/98

In these circumstances, the Court does not accept that this remedy is capable of providing appropriate protection for the right to take proceedings with a view to having the lawfulness of one's detention determined speedily by a court guaranteed by Article 5 § 4 of the Convention and that it offers reasonable prospects of success as required by the relevant case-law (see the Deweer v. Belgium judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, pp. 16-17, § 29, the Akdivar and Others v. Turkey judgment of 16 September 1996, Reports 1996-IV, p. 1211, § 68 and also Remsíková v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 46843/99, 7 December 2000 and Havala v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 47804/99, 13 September 2001.

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.05.2003 - 39753/98

The Court recalls that the right to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of one's detention be decided speedily by a court is not the same as the right to receive compensation for detention or for any erroneous action in this context (see, mutatis mutandis, Yagci and Sargin v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, § 44; Tomasi v. France, judgment of 28 July 1992, Series A no. 241-A, § 79 and Simsek v. Turkey, no. 28010/95, Commission's report of 1 March 1999).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.05.2003 - 39753/98

The Court recalls that the right to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of one's detention be decided speedily by a court is not the same as the right to receive compensation for detention or for any erroneous action in this context (see, mutatis mutandis, Yagci and Sargin v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, § 44; Tomasi v. France, judgment of 28 July 1992, Series A no. 241-A, § 79 and Simsek v. Turkey, no. 28010/95, Commission's report of 1 March 1999).