Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2018,254) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
HUNGUEST ZRT v. HUNGARY
Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 66209/10
- EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 14.06.2016 - 61203/14
GUDOVICS v. HUNGARY
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10
The Court has found on many occasions, applying to the circumstances of the case the criteria developed in its case-law (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VI), that an overall length of about five years in a civil case examined on three levels of jurisdiction does not indicate a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, for example, László Sándorné Tóth v. Hungary (dec.), no. 40909/11, § 24, 13 June 2017, and Vera Valerjevna Gudovics v. Hungary (dec.), no. 61203/14, 14 June 2016). - EGMR, 13.06.2017 - 40909/11
TÓTH v. HUNGARY
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10
The Court has found on many occasions, applying to the circumstances of the case the criteria developed in its case-law (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VI), that an overall length of about five years in a civil case examined on three levels of jurisdiction does not indicate a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, for example, László Sándorné Tóth v. Hungary (dec.), no. 40909/11, § 24, 13 June 2017, and Vera Valerjevna Gudovics v. Hungary (dec.), no. 61203/14, 14 June 2016). - EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 35382/97
COMINGERSOLL S.A. v. PORTUGAL
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10
In respect of non-pecuniary damage, the Court reiterates that the possibility that a commercial company may be awarded pecuniary compensation for non-pecuniary damage cannot be excluded, considering that the situation in issue must have caused the applicant company prolonged uncertainty in the conduct of its business (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC] no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 221, ECHR 2012; and Rock Ruby Hotels Ltd v. Turkey (just satisfaction), no. 46159/99, § 36, 26 October 2010). - EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96
FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10
The Court has found on many occasions, applying to the circumstances of the case the criteria developed in its case-law (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VI), that an overall length of about five years in a civil case examined on three levels of jurisdiction does not indicate a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, for example, László Sándorné Tóth v. Hungary (dec.), no. 40909/11, § 24, 13 June 2017, and Vera Valerjevna Gudovics v. Hungary (dec.), no. 61203/14, 14 June 2016). - EGMR, 26.10.2010 - 46159/99
ROCK RUBY HOTELS LTD v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10
In respect of non-pecuniary damage, the Court reiterates that the possibility that a commercial company may be awarded pecuniary compensation for non-pecuniary damage cannot be excluded, considering that the situation in issue must have caused the applicant company prolonged uncertainty in the conduct of its business (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC] no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 221, ECHR 2012; and Rock Ruby Hotels Ltd v. Turkey (just satisfaction), no. 46159/99, § 36, 26 October 2010).