Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  STICHTING LANDGOED STEENBERGEN AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  STICHTING LANDGOED STEENBERGEN AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 20.11.1995 - 19589/92

  BRITISH-AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY LTD c. PAYS-BAS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 19732/17

  The Court reiterates that where the right claimed is a civil right, the role of Article 6 § 1 in relation to Article 13 is that of a lex specialis, the requirements of Article 13 being absorbed by those of Article 6 § 1 (see, among other authorities, British-American Tobacco Company Ltd v. the Netherlands, 20 November 1995, § 89, Series A no. 331, and Berger-Krall and Others v. Slovenia, no. 14717/04, § 327, 12 June 2014).
• EGMR, 23.07.2013 - 30633/11

  LAY LAY COMPANY LIMITED v. MALTA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 19732/17

  The Court must ascertain whether the applicants had a clear, practical and effective opportunity to challenge the administrative act concerned (see Geffre v. France (dec.), no. 51307/99, ECHR 2003-I (extracts), and Lay Lay Company Limited v. Malta, no. 30633/11, § 56, 23 July 2013).
• EGMR, 23.01.2003 - 51307/99

  GEFFRE contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 19732/17

  The Court must ascertain whether the applicants had a clear, practical and effective opportunity to challenge the administrative act concerned (see Geffre v. France (dec.), no. 51307/99, ECHR 2003-I (extracts), and Lay Lay Company Limited v. Malta, no. 30633/11, § 56, 23 July 2013).
• EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78

  ASHINGDANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 19732/17

  Referring to the Court's case-law (see Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, Series A no. 93), it stated that Article 6 did not entail an absolute right of access to a court and that States had a certain margin of appreciation when laying down regulations limiting access to a court, as long as such limitations did not impair the very essence of the right of access to a court, pursued a legitimate aim, and complied with the requirement of proportionality.

• EGMR, 09.06.2022 - 15567/20

  XAVIER LUCAS c. FRANCE

  Consciente de l'essor de la dématérialisation de la justice au sein des États membres et de ses enjeux (paragraphes 24-26 ci-dessus), la Cour est convaincue que les technologies numériques peuvent contribuer à une meilleure administration de la justice (Stichting Landgoed Steenbergen et autres c. Pays-Bas, no 19732/17, § 50, 16 février 2021) et être mises au service des droits garantis par l'article 6 § 1. Elle convient donc de la légitimité d'un tel but.
• EGMR, 03.10.2023 - 14684/18

  EFGAN ÇETIN AND OTHERS v. TÜRKIYE

  The Court further notes that the relevant principles concerning the matter of notification of administrative and judicial decisions were recently summarised in Stichting Landgoed Steenbergen and Others v. the Netherlands (no. 19732/17, §§ 42-45, 16 February 2021).