Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NADTOCHIY v. UKRAINE

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 7, Art. 7 Abs. 1, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41 MRK
  Partly inadmissible Violation of Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03
• EGMR, 04.10.2017 - 7460/03

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 21.02.1984 - 8544/79

  Öztürk ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  Thus the customs offences in question had elements pertaining to a "criminal charge" within the meaning of Article 6 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Öztürk v. Germany, judgment of 21 February 1984, Series A no. 73, §§ 53).
• EGMR, 09.02.1995 - 17440/90

  WELCH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  In any case, whatever the characterisation of the measure in issue, the facts remains that the applicant faced a serious detriment due to its application (see Welch v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 9 February 1995, Series A no. 307-A, § 34).
• EGMR, 22.06.2000 - 32492/96

  COEME AND OTHERS v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  It cannot speculate on what the outcome of the proceedings would have been had they complied with Article 6 §§ 1. Consequently, it dismisses the applicant's claims under this head (see Lucà, cited above, § 48, and Cöeme and Others v. Belgium [GC], nos. 32492/96, 32547/96, 32548/96, 33209/96 and 33210/96, § 155, ECHR 2000-VII).

 
• EGMR, 07.06.2001 - 39594/98

  KRESS c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  The Court reiterates that the principle of equality of arms - one of the elements of the broader concept of a fair trial - requires each party to be given a reasonable opportunity to present his case under conditions that do not place him at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his opponent (see, among many other authorities and mutatis mutandis, Kress v. France [GC], no. 39594/98, § 72, ECHR 2001-VI; F.C.B. v. Italy, judgment of 28 August 1991, Series A no. 208-B, § 33; T. v. Italy, judgment of 12 October 1992, Series A no. 245-C, § 26; and Kaya v. Austria, no. 54698/00, § 28, 8 June 2006).
• EGMR, 23.03.1994 - 14220/88

  RAVNSBORG v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  In order to determine whether Article 6 is applicable under its "criminal" head, the Court will have regard to the three alternative criteria laid down in its case-law (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, judgment of 8 June 1976, Series A no. 22, p. 35, § 82; Ravnsborg v. Sweden, judgment of 23 March 1994, Series A no. 283-B, p. 28, § 30; and Putz v. Austria, judgment of 22 February 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-I, p. 324 § 31).
• EGMR, 28.08.1991 - 12151/86

  F.C.B. c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  The Court reiterates that the principle of equality of arms - one of the elements of the broader concept of a fair trial - requires each party to be given a reasonable opportunity to present his case under conditions that do not place him at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his opponent (see, among many other authorities and mutatis mutandis, Kress v. France [GC], no. 39594/98, § 72, ECHR 2001-VI; F.C.B. v. Italy, judgment of 28 August 1991, Series A no. 208-B, § 33; T. v. Italy, judgment of 12 October 1992, Series A no. 245-C, § 26; and Kaya v. Austria, no. 54698/00, § 28, 8 June 2006).
• EGMR, 12.10.1992 - 14104/88

  T. c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  The Court reiterates that the principle of equality of arms - one of the elements of the broader concept of a fair trial - requires each party to be given a reasonable opportunity to present his case under conditions that do not place him at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his opponent (see, among many other authorities and mutatis mutandis, Kress v. France [GC], no. 39594/98, § 72, ECHR 2001-VI; F.C.B. v. Italy, judgment of 28 August 1991, Series A no. 208-B, § 33; T. v. Italy, judgment of 12 October 1992, Series A no. 245-C, § 26; and Kaya v. Austria, no. 54698/00, § 28, 8 June 2006).
• EGMR, 21.10.2003 - 29010/95

  CREDIT INDUSTRIEL c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  The Court notes that the remainder of the applicant's arguments of an unjustified interference with his right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 is essentially based on the same lack of procedural protection which has already been found to give rise to a violation of Article 6 (see, Credit and Industrial Bank v. the Czech Republic, no. 29010/95, § 82, ECHR 2003-XI (extracts)).
• EGMR, 08.06.2006 - 54698/00

  ??? Abschiebung, Sperrwirkung, Wirkungen der Abschiebung, Bußgeldverfahren, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7460/03

  The Court reiterates that the principle of equality of arms - one of the elements of the broader concept of a fair trial - requires each party to be given a reasonable opportunity to present his case under conditions that do not place him at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his opponent (see, among many other authorities and mutatis mutandis, Kress v. France [GC], no. 39594/98, § 72, ECHR 2001-VI; F.C.B. v. Italy, judgment of 28 August 1991, Series A no. 208-B, § 33; T. v. Italy, judgment of 12 October 1992, Series A no. 245-C, § 26; and Kaya v. Austria, no. 54698/00, § 28, 8 June 2006).