Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 22674/02 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2009,63267) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
OBLOV v. RUSSIA
(englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (7)
- EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94
PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 22674/02
The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II). - EGMR, 29.01.2004 - 31697/03
BERDZENISHVILI v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 22674/02
The same applied to the supervisory-review procedure, although it is not normally taken into consideration as a remedy under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Berdzenishvili v. Russia (dec.), no. 31697/03, ECHR 2004-II (extracts)). - EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 54071/00
ROKHLINA v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 22674/02
The Court observes, however, that it is appropriate to take into account only the periods when the case was actually pending before the courts, that is, the periods when there was no effective judgment in the applicant's case and when the authorities were under an obligation to determine the charge against him within a "reasonable time" (see Rokhlina v. Russia, no. 54071/00, § 82, 7 April 2005).
- EGMR, 09.03.2006 - 72776/01
BRATYAKIN v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 22674/02
Although the mere possibility of reopening a criminal case is prima facie compatible with Article 6 of the Convention, the Convention requires that the authorities allow the resumption of criminal proceedings only if serious legitimate considerations outweigh the principle of legal certainty (see Bratyakin v. Russia (dec.), no. 72776/01, 9 March 2006). - EGMR, 07.12.2006 - 15007/02
IVANOV v. UKRAINE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 22674/02
Once such a reopening is allowed, the ensuing proceedings should be completed within a "reasonable time", regard being had to all pertinent factors (see, mutatis mutandis, Ivanov v. Ukraine, no. 15007/02, § 74, 7 December 2006, and Henworth v. the United Kingdom, no. 515/02, § 29, 2 November 2004). - EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90
YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 22674/02
The Court reiterates, however, the principle according to which an applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of the resources afforded to the defence by national law (see YaÄ?cı and Sargın v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, § 66). - EGMR, 15.07.2002 - 47095/99
Russland, Haftbedingungen, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 22674/02
It ends on the day on which a charge is finally determined or the proceedings are discontinued (see Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 124, ECHR 2002-VI).
- EGMR, 15.10.2009 - 27865/06
PLEMYANOVA v. RUSSIA
Although the Court is not in a position to analyse the juridical quality of the domestic courts' decisions, it considers that, since the remittal of cases for re-examination is frequently ordered as a result of errors committed by lower courts, the repetition of such orders within one set of proceedings may disclose a serious deficiency in the judicial system (see Oblov v. Russia, no. 22674/02, § 28, 15 January 2009, with further references).