Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 15.12.2009 - 14079/04 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2009,66501) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
X. v. IRELAND
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (1)
- EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01
STEEL ET MORRIS c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2009 - 14079/04
Even if future proceedings might have taken place in the High Court, in the circumstances of the present case, where the trial had taken place in the same building as the High Court, where the applicant's legal representatives were still present and, in particular, where the procedure for applying for an interim injunction from the High Court would have been relatively straightforward, it cannot be said that legal aid was required so as to make those future proceedings effective (see, mutatis mutandis, Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 61, ECHR 2005-II).
- EGMR, 14.09.2010 - 6991/08
HYDE PARK AND OTHERS v. MOLDOVA (Nos. 5 and 6)
Nonetheless, as in any case concerning the question of exhaustion of domestic remedies, the burden of proof is on the Government claiming non-exhaustion to satisfy the Court that an effective remedy was available in theory and in practice at the relevant time, namely, that the remedy was accessible, capable of providing redress in respect of the applicant's complaints and offered reasonable prospects of success (see Demopoulos and others v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46113/99 and others, 1 March 2010; Apostol v. Georgia, no. 40765/02, § 36, ECHR 2006-XIV; and X. v. Ireland (dec.), no. 14079/04, 15 December 2009, with further references).