Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  WERSEL v. POLAND

  Art. 6 Abs. 1+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 6, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-c (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Wersel v. Poland

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [FRE]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

• EGMR, 18.12.2001 - 29692/96

  R.D. v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  However, the Court must satisfy itself that the method chosen by the domestic authorities in a particular case is compatible with the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, in criminal law proceedings, R.D. v. Poland, nos. 29692/96 and 34612/97, § 44, 18 December 2001; Kulikowski v. Poland, no. 18353/03, §§ 58 and 59 ECHR 2009-... (extracts); Antonicelli v. Poland, no. 2815/05, §§ 33 and 34, 19 May 2009 and, in civil law proceedings, Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, §§ 39-43, 27 June 2006).

  The Court notes at the outset that the facts of the instant application are similar to those in the case of R.D. v. Poland (see R.D. v. Poland, nos. 29692/96 and 34612/97, 18 December 2001), in which a violation of Article 6 § 1 read in conjunction with Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention was found by the Court.

• EGMR, 09.10.1979 - 6289/73

  AIREY v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  The Court emphasises the importance of the right of access to a court, having regard to the prominent place held in a democratic society by the right to a fair trial (see Airey v. Ireland, judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32, p. 12-13, § 24).
• EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 42527/98

  Enteignung eines Gemäldes in Tschechien auf Grund der Benes-Dekrete - …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  Furthermore, a limitation will not be compatible with Article 6 § 1 if it does not pursue a legitimate aim and if there is not a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be achieved (see Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 93, p. 24, § 57; Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein v. Germany [GC], no. 42527/98, § 44, ECHR 2001-VIII, mutatis mutandis).

 
• EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78

  ASHINGDANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  Furthermore, a limitation will not be compatible with Article 6 § 1 if it does not pursue a legitimate aim and if there is not a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be achieved (see Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 93, p. 24, § 57; Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein v. Germany [GC], no. 42527/98, § 44, ECHR 2001-VIII, mutatis mutandis).
• EGMR, 26.10.1984 - 9186/80

  DE CUBBER v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  A restrictive interpretation of that right would not be consonant with the object and purpose of this provision (see De Cubber v. Belgium, judgment of 26 October 1984, Series A no. 86, § 30).
• EGMR, 26.07.2002 - 32911/96

  MEFTAH AND OTHERS v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  Given the special nature of the court of cassation's role, which is limited to reviewing whether the law has been correctly applied, the Court is able to accept that the procedure followed in such courts may be more formal (see Meftah and Others v. France [GC], nos. 32911/96, 35237/97 and 34595/97, § 41, ECHR 2002-VII).
• EGMR, 25.09.1992 - 13191/87

  PHAM HOANG c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  The first is lack of "sufficient means to pay for legal assistance", the second is that "the interests of justice" must require that such assistance be given free (see, among many other authorities, the Pham Hoang v. France judgment of 25 September 1992, Series A no. 243 p. 23, § 39).
• EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 35237/97

  ADOUD ET BOSONI c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  Given the special nature of the court of cassation's role, which is limited to reviewing whether the law has been correctly applied, the Court is able to accept that the procedure followed in such courts may be more formal (see Meftah and Others v. France [GC], nos. 32911/96, 35237/97 and 34595/97, § 41, ECHR 2002-VII).
• EGMR, 19.05.2009 - 2815/05

  ANTONICELLI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  However, the Court must satisfy itself that the method chosen by the domestic authorities in a particular case is compatible with the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, in criminal law proceedings, R.D. v. Poland, nos. 29692/96 and 34612/97, § 44, 18 December 2001; Kulikowski v. Poland, no. 18353/03, §§ 58 and 59 ECHR 2009-... (extracts); Antonicelli v. Poland, no. 2815/05, §§ 33 and 34, 19 May 2009 and, in civil law proceedings, Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, §§ 39-43, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 27.06.2006 - 12825/02

  TABOR v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  However, the Court must satisfy itself that the method chosen by the domestic authorities in a particular case is compatible with the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, in criminal law proceedings, R.D. v. Poland, nos. 29692/96 and 34612/97, § 44, 18 December 2001; Kulikowski v. Poland, no. 18353/03, §§ 58 and 59 ECHR 2009-... (extracts); Antonicelli v. Poland, no. 2815/05, §§ 33 and 34, 19 May 2009 and, in civil law proceedings, Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, §§ 39-43, 27 June 2006).