Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ROMIC AND OTHERS v. CROATIA

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Adversarial trial;Equality of arms);Violation of Article 6+6-1 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-3-c - Defence in person) (Article 6 - Right to a fair ...

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 17092/04

  KOZLITIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2020 - 22238/13

  The appellate courts were therefore called upon to make a full assessment of their guilt or innocence in respect of the charges against them, in the light of not only the arguments that they had raised before the first-instance court, but also those concerning the alleged failures of that court to establish all the relevant facts and to apply the relevant substantive and procedural rules correctly (see Bosak and Others, cited above, § 106; compare Abdulgadirov v. Azerbaijan, no. 24510/06, § 42, 20 June 2013, and Kozlitin v. Russia, no. 17092/04, § 63, 14 November 2013; and contrast Fejde v. Sweden, 29 October 1991, § 33, Series A no. 212-C, and Hermi v. Italy [GC], no. 18114/02, § 85, ECHR 2006-XII).
• EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 24510/06

  ABDULGADIROV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2020 - 22238/13

  The appellate courts were therefore called upon to make a full assessment of their guilt or innocence in respect of the charges against them, in the light of not only the arguments that they had raised before the first-instance court, but also those concerning the alleged failures of that court to establish all the relevant facts and to apply the relevant substantive and procedural rules correctly (see Bosak and Others, cited above, § 106; compare Abdulgadirov v. Azerbaijan, no. 24510/06, § 42, 20 June 2013, and Kozlitin v. Russia, no. 17092/04, § 63, 14 November 2013; and contrast Fejde v. Sweden, 29 October 1991, § 33, Series A no. 212-C, and Hermi v. Italy [GC], no. 18114/02, § 85, ECHR 2006-XII).
• EGMR, 29.10.1991 - 12631/87

  FEJDE c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2020 - 22238/13

  The appellate courts were therefore called upon to make a full assessment of their guilt or innocence in respect of the charges against them, in the light of not only the arguments that they had raised before the first-instance court, but also those concerning the alleged failures of that court to establish all the relevant facts and to apply the relevant substantive and procedural rules correctly (see Bosak and Others, cited above, § 106; compare Abdulgadirov v. Azerbaijan, no. 24510/06, § 42, 20 June 2013, and Kozlitin v. Russia, no. 17092/04, § 63, 14 November 2013; and contrast Fejde v. Sweden, 29 October 1991, § 33, Series A no. 212-C, and Hermi v. Italy [GC], no. 18114/02, § 85, ECHR 2006-XII).

• EGMR, 21.09.2021 - 74209/16

  WILLEMS ET GORJON c. BELGIQUE

  Elle a également constaté que le droit interne belge ne s'opposait pas par principe à une réouverture de la procédure en cas de radiation de l'affaire de son rôle sur base d'une déclaration unilatérale du Gouvernement (paragraphe 19 de la décision précitée, cité au paragraphe 20 ci-dessus ; comparer avec des affaires où la Cour a refusé de rayer l'affaire du rôle au motif qu'une déclaration unilatérale ne constituait pas une base suffisamment certaine pour obtenir la réouverture de la procédure interne, par exemple Aviakompaniya A.T.I., ZAT, précité, §§ 36-41, Romic et autres c. Croatie, nos 22238/13 et 6 autres, §§ 84-87, 14 mai 2020, et Keskin c. Pays-Bas, no 2205/16, §§ 30-32, 19 janvier 2021).
• EGMR, 14.11.2023 - 71657/17

  KITANOVSKA AND TRAJKOVSKI v. NORTH MACEDONIA

  Accordingly, it cannot be said with a sufficient degree of certainty that the procedure for reopening civil proceedings would be available were the Court to accept the Government's unilateral declaration (see, mutatis mutandis, Romic and Others v. Croatia, nos. 22238/13 and 6 others, §§ 84-85, 14 May 2020).
• EGMR, 04.04.2023 - 79356/17

  STASSART c. FRANCE

  À défaut, la Cour peut rejeter la déclaration amiable et poursuivre l'examen de la requête (voir, parmi d'autres, Hakimi c. Belgique, no 665/08, §§ 29 à 30, 29 juin 2010, Dridi c. Allemagne, no 35778/11, §§ 24 et 26, 26 juillet 2018, et Romic et autres c. Croatie, no 22238/13 et 6 autres, §§ 83, 85 et 87, 14 mai 2020).

 
• EGMR, 20.01.2022 - 55724/19

  DRACA v. CROATIA

  22238/13 and 6 others, § 102, 14 May 2020).
• EGMR, 14.09.2023 - 15983/21

  HANUSA v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  However, the case at hand does not concern a complaint about unfairness of the proceedings, in respect of which the Court in principle does not accept a unilateral declaration if the applicants seek a reopening of the proceedings at the domestic level and if it is not certain whether he would have that possibility after the Government's unilateral declaration (see, for example, Aviakompaniya A.T.I, ZAT v. Ukraine, no. 1006/07, §§ 36-41, 5 October 2017; Romic and Others v. Croatia, no. 22238/13 and 6 others, §§ 84-87, 14 May 2020; and Keskin v. the Netherlands, no. 2205/16, §§ 30-32, 19 January 2021).
• EGMR - 15597/22 (anhängig)

  MARO? EVIC v. CROATIA

  If the applicant can still be considered as a victim of the alleged violation, has there been a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on account of the fact that the prosecution's reasoned submission was not forwarded to the defence (see Zahirovic v. Croatia, no. 58590/11, §§ 42-50, 25 April 2013; Bosak and Others v. Croatia, nos. 40429/14 and 3 others, §§ 91-101, 6 June 2019, and Romic and Others v. Croatia, nos. 22238/13 and 6 others, §§ 91-95, 14 May 2020)?.
• EGMR, 09.12.2021 - 56899/16

  NASIRLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  22238/13 and 6 others, §§ 77-87, 14 May 2020).
• EGMR, 24.06.2021 - 63418/13

  DUMENIL c. FRANCE

  La Cour est donc amenée à examiner la question de savoir si une décision de radiation du rôle prise à la suite d'une déclaration amiable du Gouvernement permet au requérant de demander la réouverture de la procédure pénale et, à défaut, elle peut rejeter la déclaration amiable et poursuivre l'examen de la requête (cf., parmi d'autres, Hakimi c. Belgique, no 665/08, § 29-30, 29 juin 2010, Dridi c. Allemagne, no 35778/11, §§ 24 et 26, 26 juillet 2018, et Romic et autres c. Croatie, no 22238/13 et six autres, §§ 83, 85 et 87, 14 mai 2020).