Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  OGNYAN ASENOV v. BULGARIA

  (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

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

• EGMR, 25.04.1983 - 8398/78

  Pakelli ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.02.2011 - 38157/04

  The Court thus lacks an adequate basis on which to conclude that throughout that time the applicant remained unable to reimburse the relatively modest fees of his counsel (see paragraphs 10 and 13 above and also, mutatis mutandis, P.W. v. Denmark, cited above, and contrast, mutatis mutandis, Pakelli v. Germany, 25 April 1983, § 34, Series A no. 64).
• EGMR, 25.09.1992 - 13611/88

  Klaus Croissant

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.02.2011 - 38157/04

  Referring to Croissant v. Germany (25 September 1992, Series A no. 237-B), it expressed the view that that requirement did not run counter to Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention.
• EGMR, 28.11.1978 - 6210/73

  Luedicke, Belkacem und Koç ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.02.2011 - 38157/04

  It left the issue open, saying that it did not intend to establish whether and under what conditions the expenses associated with the provision of free legal assistance under Article 6 § 3 (c) could be awarded against or left to be borne by the accused after his or her conviction (see Luedicke, Belkacem and Koç v. Germany, 28 November 1978, § 44, Series A no. 29).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 22774/93

  IMMOBILIARE SAFFI v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.02.2011 - 38157/04

  It observes that the requirement for an individual who has been finally convicted to bear the costs of proceedings, including the fees and disbursements of his or her court-appointed counsel, flowed directly from the wording of Article 169 § 2 of the 1974 Code of Criminal Procedure (see paragraph 18 above and, mutatis mutandis, Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy [GC], no. 22774/93, § 42 in limine, ECHR 1999-V).

• EGMR, 13.11.2012 - 47039/11

  HRISTOZOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  It has not been disputed that in his decisions in respect of each of the applicants the Agency's Director applied that provision correctly; this is confirmed by the opinion expressed by the Ombudsman of the Republic (see paragraph 16 above) and by the Government's submissions (see, mutatis mutandis, Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy [GC], no. 22774/93, § 42 in limine, ECHR 1999-V; Urbárska Obec Trencianske Biskupice v. Slovakia, no. 74258/01, § 86, 27 November 2007; Ognyan Asenov v. Bulgaria, no. 38157/04, § 32, 17 February 2011; and Valkov and Others v. Bulgaria, nos.
• EGMR, 25.10.2011 - 2033/04

  VALKOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  It follows that applications for judicial review of the NSSI's decisions were not an effective remedy that the applicants had to use (see, mutatis mutandis, Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy [GC], no. 22774/93, § 42 in limine, ECHR 1999-V; Urbárska Obec Trencianske Biskupice v. Slovakia, no. 74258/01, § 86, 27 November 2007; and Ognyan Asenov v. Bulgaria, no. 38157/04, § 32, 17 February 2011).
• EGMR, 12.07.2016 - 19552/05

  TODOROV c. BULGARIE

  Un résumé des dispositions de la législation interne relatives à la désignation d'un avocat d'office au cours du procès pénal et au paiement et recouvrement des frais et dépens engagés pendant la procédure pénale, ainsi qu'un aperçu de la jurisprudence des tribunaux internes en la matière, peuvent être trouvés dans l'arrêt Ognyan Asenov c. Bulgarie (no 38157/04, §§ 16-28, 17 février 2011).
• EGMR, 23.08.2011 - 19552/05

  TODOROV c. BULGARIE

  Le résumé des dispositions de la législation interne relatives à la désignation d'un avocat d'office au cours du procès pénal et aux paiement et recouvrement des frais et dépens engagés pendant la procédure pénale, ainsi qu'un aperçu de la jurisprudence des tribunaux internes en la matière, peuvent être trouvés dans l'arrêt Ognyan Asenov c. Bulgarie, no 38157/04, §§ 16-28, 17 février 2011.