Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  JEVREMOVIC v. SERBIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 13, Art. 13+6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 8 Violation of Art. 13+6-1 (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 39221/98

  SCOZZARI ET GIUNTA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 3150/05

  It follows, inter alia, that a judgment in which the Court finds a breach imposes on the respondent State a legal obligation not just to pay those concerned the sums awarded by way of just satisfaction, but also to choose, subject to supervision by the Committee of Ministers, the general and/or, if appropriate, individual measures to be adopted in their domestic legal order to put an end to the violation found by the Court and to redress, in so far as possible, the effects thereof (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII).
• EGMR, 16.11.2006 - 39299/02

  MUZEVIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 3150/05

  The Government should therefore, with particular diligence and by appropriate means, bring to a conclusion the remainder of the ongoing child maintenance dispute (see, mutatis mutandis, Muzevic v. Croatia, no. 39299/02, § 91, 16 November 2006).
• EGMR, 08.06.2006 - 75529/01

  Verschleppter Prozess - Mann prozessiert seit 16 Jahren um Entschädigung nach …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 3150/05

  Finally, the Court reiterates that the decisive question in assessing the effectiveness of a remedy concerning a complaint about procedural delay is whether or not there is a possibility for the applicant to be provided with direct and speedy redress, rather than an indirect protection of the rights guaranteed under Article 6 (see, mutatis mutandis, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 195, ECHR 2006, and Sürmeli v. Germany [GC], no. 75529/01, § 101, 8 June 2006).

 
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 3150/05

  In particular, a remedy of this sort shall be "effective" if it can be used either to expedite the proceedings at issue or to provide the litigant with adequate redress for delays which have already occurred (see, mutatis mutandis, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 157-159, ECHR 2000-XI, Mifsud v. France (dec.), [GC], no. 57220/00, § 17, ECHR 2002-VIII, and Sürmeli v. Germany [GC], cited above, § 99).
• EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00

  MIFSUD contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 3150/05

  In particular, a remedy of this sort shall be "effective" if it can be used either to expedite the proceedings at issue or to provide the litigant with adequate redress for delays which have already occurred (see, mutatis mutandis, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 157-159, ECHR 2000-XI, Mifsud v. France (dec.), [GC], no. 57220/00, § 17, ECHR 2002-VIII, and Sürmeli v. Germany [GC], cited above, § 99).
• EGMR, 29.03.1989 - 11118/84

  BOCK v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 3150/05

  Finally, the Court notes that particular diligence is required in all cases concerning civil status and capacity (see Bock v. Germany, judgment of 29 March 1989, Series A no. 150, p. 23, § 49) and that this requirement is additionally reinforced in States where domestic law itself provides that certain kinds of cases must be resolved with particular urgency (see, in the employment context, Borgese v. Italy, judgment of 26 February 1992, Series A no. 228-B, § 18).

• EGMR, 18.03.2021 - 24340/07

  PETRELLA c. ITALIE

  Elle est parvenue à cette même conclusion dans le cas où la procédure engagée ne prévoit pas la participation du requérant, mais uniquement le droit de celui-ci à être informé de l'issue de la procédure même (Jevremovic c. Serbie, no 3150/05, § 72, 17 juillet 2007).
• EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 63206/10

  JÜSSI OSAWE v. ESTONIA

  The Court has held on numerous occasions that Article 6 was applicable to paternity proceedings (see paragraph 36 above and also, for example, Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, §§ 35-46, ECHR 2002-I, and Jevremovic v. Serbia, no. 3150/05, §§ 66-86, 17 July 2007).