Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BACEV v. \

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 17.01.1970 - 2689/65

  DELCOURT c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2006 - 13299/02

  Nevertheless, a Contracting State which sets up an appeal system is required to ensure that persons within its jurisdiction enjoy before appellate courts the fundamental guarantees of Article 6 (see Delcourt v. Belgium, judgment of 17 January 1970, Series A no. 11, p. 14-15, § 25).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2006 - 13299/02

  According to the Court's case-law, this provision applies only where an individual has an "arguable claim" to have been the victim of a violation of a Convention right (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, § 52).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 23805/94

  BELLET c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2006 - 13299/02

  For the right of access to be effective, an individual must have a clear, practical opportunity to challenge an act that is an interference with his rights (see Bellet v. France, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 333-B, p. 42, § 36).

 
• EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78

  ASHINGDANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2006 - 13299/02

  The Court recalls that the right to a court, of which the right of access is one aspect (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18, p. 18, § 36), is not absolute; it may be subject to limitations permitted by implication, particularly regarding the conditions of admissibility of an appeal (see Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 93, p. 24-25, § 57).
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2006 - 13299/02

  The Court recalls that the right to a court, of which the right of access is one aspect (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18, p. 18, § 36), is not absolute; it may be subject to limitations permitted by implication, particularly regarding the conditions of admissibility of an appeal (see Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 93, p. 24-25, § 57).
• EGMR, 05.11.2002 - 48539/99

  Selbstbelastungsfreiheit (Umgehungsschutz; Schweigerecht; materieller / …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2006 - 13299/02

  It would note in this regard its own practice in finding a general reference to a provision of the Convention, without indicating the factual basis and the nature of the alleged violations, as insufficient to constitute valid introduction of specific complaints submitted later out of time (Allan v. the United Kingdom, no. 48539/99, ECHR 2002-IX; Zervakis v. Greece, no. 64321/01, 17 October 2002).

• EGMR, 19.06.2008 - 10649/03

  FETAOVSKI v.

  The Court considers the aim pursued by the 15-day time-limit prescribed in Section 334 of the Civil Proceedings Act as it was then in force was legitimate in the interests of the good administration of justice (see Bacev v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 13299/02, 14 February 2006).