Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 56335/10, 23228/14 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2020,39326) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
KOVALEVA v. RUSSIA
Inadmissible (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
KOVALEVA v. RUSSIA and 1 other application
Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 31365/96
VARBANOV v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 56335/10
It further notes that an application may be rejected as an abuse of the right of application under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention, among other reasons, if it was knowingly based on untrue facts (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Popov v. Moldova (no. 1), no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Kerechashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006-V; and Predescu v. Romania, no. 21447/03, §§ 24-27, 2 December 2008). - EGMR, 02.05.2006 - 5667/02
KÉRÉTCHACHVILI c. GEORGIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 56335/10
It further notes that an application may be rejected as an abuse of the right of application under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention, among other reasons, if it was knowingly based on untrue facts (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Popov v. Moldova (no. 1), no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Kerechashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006-V; and Predescu v. Romania, no. 21447/03, §§ 24-27, 2 December 2008). - EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 67208/01
REHÁK v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 56335/10
It further notes that an application may be rejected as an abuse of the right of application under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention, among other reasons, if it was knowingly based on untrue facts (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Popov v. Moldova (no. 1), no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Kerechashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006-V; and Predescu v. Romania, no. 21447/03, §§ 24-27, 2 December 2008). - EGMR, 18.01.2005 - 74153/01
POPOV v. MOLDOVA (No. 1)
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 56335/10
It further notes that an application may be rejected as an abuse of the right of application under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention, among other reasons, if it was knowingly based on untrue facts (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Popov v. Moldova (no. 1), no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Kerechashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006-V; and Predescu v. Romania, no. 21447/03, §§ 24-27, 2 December 2008). - EGMR, 02.12.2008 - 21447/03
PREDESCU c. ROUMANIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 56335/10
It further notes that an application may be rejected as an abuse of the right of application under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention, among other reasons, if it was knowingly based on untrue facts (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Popov v. Moldova (no. 1), no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Kerechashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006-V; and Predescu v. Romania, no. 21447/03, §§ 24-27, 2 December 2008).