Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ZAHIROVIC AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15, 7294/15, 7311/15, 7356/15, 7419/15, 7434/15, 10758/15
• EGMR, 13.11.2019 - 4954/15

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 14.11.2017 - 20514/15

  SPAHIC AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15

  Notably, the Court has held that it is not open to authorities to cite lack of funds as an excuse for not honouring a judgment debt (see, also, Spahic and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, nos. 20514/15 and 15 others, § 25, 14 November 2017, and Kunic and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, nos. 68955/12 and 15 others, § 26, 14 November 2017).

  20514/15 and 15 others, § 38, 14 November 2017, and in Kunic and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, nos.

• EGMR, 14.11.2017 - 68955/12

  KUNIC AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15

  Notably, the Court has held that it is not open to authorities to cite lack of funds as an excuse for not honouring a judgment debt (see, also, Spahic and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, nos. 20514/15 and 15 others, § 25, 14 November 2017, and Kunic and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, nos. 68955/12 and 15 others, § 26, 14 November 2017).

  68955/12 and 15 others, § 40, 14 November 2017.

• EGMR, 22.12.2009 - 27996/06

  SEJDIC ET FINCI c. BOSNIE-HERZÉGOVINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15

  Although the respondent State did not raise any objection as to the Court's competence ratione personae, this issue calls for consideration ex officio by the Court (see Sejdic and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 27996/06 and 34836/06, § 27, ECHR 2009).

 
• EGMR, 07.05.2002 - 59498/00

  BURDOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15

  Admittedly, a delay in the execution of a judgment may be justified in particular circumstances, but the delay may not be such as to impair the essence of the right protected under Article 6 § 1 (see Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 35, ECHR 2002-III, and Teteriny v. Russia, no. 11931/03, § 41, 30 June 2005).
• EGMR - 34179/08 (anhängig)

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15

  The Court requires itemised bills and invoices that are sufficiently detailed to enable it to determine to what extent the above requirements have been met (see Maktouf and Damjanovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08, § 94, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 30.06.2005 - 11931/03

  TETERINY v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15

  Admittedly, a delay in the execution of a judgment may be justified in particular circumstances, but the delay may not be such as to impair the essence of the right protected under Article 6 § 1 (see Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 35, ECHR 2002-III, and Teteriny v. Russia, no. 11931/03, § 41, 30 June 2005).
• EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 28971/05

  KUDIC v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15

  The redress afforded by the national authorities must be appropriate and sufficient (see Kudic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 28971/05, § 17, 9 December 2008).
• EGMR, 15.11.2011 - 28735/06

  RUNIC AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 4954/15

  Therefore, they may still claim to be victims within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention in relation to the period during which the judgments remained unenforced (see Runic and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, nos. 28735/06 and 26 others, § 16, 15 November 2011).