Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  IWANCZUK v. POLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 04.05.2000 - 31657/96

  BUSCARINI contre SAINT-MARIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2009 - 39279/05

  The phrase "established by law" covers not only the legal basis for the very existence of a "tribunal" but also the composition of the bench in each case (see Buscarini v. San Marino (dec.), no. 31657/96, 4 May 2000; Posokhov v. Russia, no. 63486/00, § 39, ECHR 2003-IV).
• EGMR, 22.06.2000 - 32492/96

  COEME AND OTHERS v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2009 - 39279/05

  In countries where the law is codified, organisation of the judicial system cannot be left to the discretion of the judicial authorities, although this does not mean that the courts do not have some latitude to interpret the relevant national legislation (see Coëme and Others v. Belgium, nos. 32492/96, 32547/96, 32548/96, 33209/96 and 33210/96, § 98, ECHR 2000-VII; Gurov v. Moldova, no. 36455/02, § 34, 11 July 2006).
• EGMR, 04.03.2003 - 63486/00

  POSOKHOV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2009 - 39279/05

  The phrase "established by law" covers not only the legal basis for the very existence of a "tribunal" but also the composition of the bench in each case (see Buscarini v. San Marino (dec.), no. 31657/96, 4 May 2000; Posokhov v. Russia, no. 63486/00, § 39, ECHR 2003-IV).
• EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 36455/02

  GUROV v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2009 - 39279/05

  In countries where the law is codified, organisation of the judicial system cannot be left to the discretion of the judicial authorities, although this does not mean that the courts do not have some latitude to interpret the relevant national legislation (see Coëme and Others v. Belgium, nos. 32492/96, 32547/96, 32548/96, 33209/96 and 33210/96, § 98, ECHR 2000-VII; Gurov v. Moldova, no. 36455/02, § 34, 11 July 2006).
• EGMR, 12.07.2007 - 74613/01

  Rechtssache J. gegen DEUTSCHLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 17.11.2009 - 39279/05

  Having regard to the general principle according to which it is in the first place for the national courts themselves to interpret the provisions of domestic law, the Court considers that it may not question their interpretation unless there has been a flagrant violation of domestic law (see, Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, § 114 in fine, 28 November 2002; Jorgic v. Germany, no. 74613/01, § 65, ECHR 2007-IX (extracts)).

• EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 46131/19

  TOIVANEN v. FINLAND

  Thus far, the Court is satisfied that the transfer of the case from the three-judge bench to the extended composition was in compliance with the relevant criteria under its established case-law (see Iwanczuk v. Poland (dec.), no. 39279/05, 17 November 2009 and DMD GROUP, a.s., cited above, § 66) and it did not in and of itself lead to the applicant's trial becoming unfair within the meaning of Article 6 of the Convention.