Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 15.09.2015 - 15619/12 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,37558) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
PAPAIOANNOU v. CYPRUS
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82
BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.09.2015 - 15619/12
Given that the applicant's substantive complaints have been rejected either because they are manifestly ill-founded or for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, it follows that the applicant does not have an "arguable claim" for the purposes of Article 13 (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, 24 April 1988, § 52, Series A no. 131). - EGMR, 09.12.2014 - 6830/08
BUECHEL c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.09.2015 - 15619/12
Consequently, Article 35 § 1 is considered not to be complied with when an appeal is not accepted for examination because of a procedural mistake by the applicant (see, Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, §§ 142 and 143, ECHR 2010, with further references therein, and, as recent authorities, Carpelan v. Sweden (dec.), no. 51454/11, 21 April 2015 and Buechel v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 6830/08, 9 December 2014). - EGMR, 21.04.2015 - 51454/11
CARPELAN v. SWEDEN
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.09.2015 - 15619/12
Consequently, Article 35 § 1 is considered not to be complied with when an appeal is not accepted for examination because of a procedural mistake by the applicant (see, Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, §§ 142 and 143, ECHR 2010, with further references therein, and, as recent authorities, Carpelan v. Sweden (dec.), no. 51454/11, 21 April 2015 and Buechel v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 6830/08, 9 December 2014).
- EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 51127/18
STEFANOV v. BULGARIA
17153/11 and 29 others, §§ 72 and 80, 25 March 2014; Papaioannou v. Cyprus (dec.), no. 15619/12, §§ 28-30, 15 September 2015; and Kunert v. Poland, no. 8981/14, §§ 42-43, 4 April 2019), such as a failure to meet a time-limit (see, for example, Ben Salah Adraqui and Dhaime v. Spain (dec.), no. 45023/98, ECHR 2000-IV; Alinak v. Turkey (dec.), no. 30514/96, 17 October 2000; and Peru?. v. Slovenia, no. 35016/05, § 47, 27 September 2012).