Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 17.03.2011 - 14704/03 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,56773) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BUROV v. UKRAINE
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 6-1 (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94
PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.03.2011 - 14704/03
The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II). - EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95
LABITA c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.03.2011 - 14704/03
It further reiterates that, in determining the length of detention pending trial under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, the period to be taken into consideration begins on the day the accused is taken into custody and ends on the day when the charge is determined, even if only by a court of first instance (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 145 and 147, ECHR 2000-IV). - EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.03.2011 - 14704/03
The Court also reiterates that, in view of the essential link between Article 5 § 3 of the Convention and paragraph 1 (c) of that Article, a person convicted at first instance cannot be regarded as being detained "for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence", as specified in the latter provision, but is in the position provided for by Article 5 § 1 (a), which authorises deprivation of liberty "after conviction by a competent court" (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 104 and 105, ECHR 2000-XI). - EGMR, 16.01.2007 - 27561/02
SOLMAZ c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.03.2011 - 14704/03
As to the remaining periods, the Court reiterates that consecutive detention periods of the applicant should be regarded as a whole, and the six-month period should only start to run from the end of the last period of pre-trial custody (see Solmaz v. Turkey, no. 27561/02, § 36, ECHR 2007-II (extracts)), that is from 27 April 2004.