Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VALCHEVA AND ABRASHEV v. BULGARIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  VALCHEVA v. BULGARIA and 1 other application

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (26)

• EGMR, 29.05.2012 - 53126/07

  TARON v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  The Court has consistently held that Contracting States are afforded some discretion as to the manner in which they conform to their obligations under Article 13 of the Convention - which has a close affinity with Article 35 § 1 - to put in place effective domestic remedies (see, among other authorities, Kudla, cited above, § 154; Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 188, ECHR 2006-V; Žunic, cited above; and Taron v. Germany (dec.), no. 53126/07, § 41, 29 May 2012).
• EGMR, 26.03.2013 - 4860/09

  TURGUT ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  57984/00, 60237/00, 60242/00, 60679/00, 60680/00, 68563/01 and 60226/00, ECHR 2002-IX; Charzynski, cited above, §§ 35 and 40; Grzincic, cited above, §§ 99-106; Vokurka, cited above, § 49; Fakhretdinov and Others, cited above, §§ 30-31; Taron, cited above, §§ 36 and 42-44; and Turgut and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 4860/09, §§ 49-56, 26 March 2013).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 35382/97

  COMINGERSOLL S.A. v. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  Under that case-law, legal persons, including commercial companies, are in principle entitled to compensation for non-pecuniary damage flowing from the unreasonable length of proceedings (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, §§ 31-37, ECHR 2000-IV; Rímskokatolická Farnost Obríství v. the Czech Republic, no. 65196/01, § 38, 24 May 2005; and Provide S.r.l. v. Italy, no. 62155/00, §§ 10, 24 and 46, 5 July 2007).

 
• EGMR, 06.09.2001 - 69789/01

  BRUSCO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  In particular, the Court has previously departed from this rule in cases against Italy, Croatia, Slovakia, Poland, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Germany, Russia and Turkey concerning newly introduced remedies in respect of the excessive length of proceedings (see Brusco v. Italy (dec.), no. 69789/01, ECHR 2001-IX; Giacometti and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 34939/97, ECHR 2001-XII; Nogolica v. Croatia (dec.), no. 77784/01, ECHR 2002-VIII; Andrásik and Others v. Slovakia (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 05.09.2002 - 77784/01

  NOGOLICA c. CROATIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  In particular, the Court has previously departed from this rule in cases against Italy, Croatia, Slovakia, Poland, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Germany, Russia and Turkey concerning newly introduced remedies in respect of the excessive length of proceedings (see Brusco v. Italy (dec.), no. 69789/01, ECHR 2001-IX; Giacometti and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 34939/97, ECHR 2001-XII; Nogolica v. Croatia (dec.), no. 77784/01, ECHR 2002-VIII; Andrásik and Others v. Slovakia (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 22.10.2002 - 57984/00

  ANDRASIK AND OTHERS v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  57984/00, 60237/00, 60242/00, 60679/00, 60680/00, 68563/01 and 60226/00, ECHR 2002-IX; Charzynski, cited above, §§ 35 and 40; Grzincic, cited above, §§ 99-106; Vokurka, cited above, § 49; Fakhretdinov and Others, cited above, §§ 30-31; Taron, cited above, §§ 36 and 42-44; and Turgut and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 4860/09, §§ 49-56, 26 March 2013).
• EGMR, 05.07.2007 - 62155/00

  PROVIDE S.R.L. c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  Under that case-law, legal persons, including commercial companies, are in principle entitled to compensation for non-pecuniary damage flowing from the unreasonable length of proceedings (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, §§ 31-37, ECHR 2000-IV; Rímskokatolická Farnost Obríství v. the Czech Republic, no. 65196/01, § 38, 24 May 2005; and Provide S.r.l. v. Italy, no. 62155/00, §§ 10, 24 and 46, 5 July 2007).
• EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 65196/01

  RÍMSKOKATOLICKÁ FARNOST OBRÍSTVÍ v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  Under that case-law, legal persons, including commercial companies, are in principle entitled to compensation for non-pecuniary damage flowing from the unreasonable length of proceedings (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, §§ 31-37, ECHR 2000-IV; Rímskokatolická Farnost Obríství v. the Czech Republic, no. 65196/01, § 38, 24 May 2005; and Provide S.r.l. v. Italy, no. 62155/00, §§ 10, 24 and 46, 5 July 2007).
• EGMR, 06.09.1978 - 5029/71

  Klass u.a. ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  However, since the powers and procedural guarantees an authority possesses are relevant in determining whether the remedy before it is effective (see Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, § 67, Series A no. 28; Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, § 113 (b), Series A no. 61; Leander v. Sweden, 26 March 1987, § 77 (b), Series A no. 116; and, more recently, Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 27765/09, § 197, ECHR 2012), it should be observed that the Inspectorate enjoys considerable independence (see paragraphs 47 and 48 above).
• EGMR, 26.03.1987 - 9248/81

  LEANDER c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 6194/11

  However, since the powers and procedural guarantees an authority possesses are relevant in determining whether the remedy before it is effective (see Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, § 67, Series A no. 28; Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, § 113 (b), Series A no. 61; Leander v. Sweden, 26 March 1987, § 77 (b), Series A no. 116; and, more recently, Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 27765/09, § 197, ECHR 2012), it should be observed that the Inspectorate enjoys considerable independence (see paragraphs 47 and 48 above).
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72

  SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 01.03.2010 - 46113/99

  Demopoulos ./. Türkei und 7 andere
• EGMR, 13.12.2012 - 22689/07

  DE SOUZA RIBEIRO v. FRANCE
• EGMR, 30.04.2013 - 10755/13

  UZUN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00

  MIFSUD contre la FRANCE
• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 15212/03

  CHARZYNSKI c. POLOGNE
• EGMR - 10200/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR - 21819/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR - 14163/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR - 19993/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 01.03.2010 - 3843/02
• EGMR - 13466/03

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 23.09.2010 - 26716/09

  FAKHRETDINOV and OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 03.05.2007 - 26867/02

  GRZINCIC c. SLOVENIE
• EGMR, 20.11.2012 - 58497/08

  TRUPS v. LATVIA
• EGMR, 18.10.2007 - 24342/04

  ZUNIC v. SLOVENIA

• EGMR, 30.05.2017 - 69591/14

  KOLEV c. BULGARIE

  La Cour a déjà reconnu que ces recours pouvaient en principe apporter un redressement approprié en cas de violation de l'exigence de délai raisonnable et qu'ils devaient être exercés par les requérants potentiels préalablement à l'introduction de leur requête devant elle (Balakchiev, décision précitée, et Valcheva et Abrashev c. Bulgarie (déc.), nos 6194/11 et 34887/11, 18 juin 2013).
• EGMR, 03.03.2015 - 29263/12

  S.Z. c. BULGARIE

  La Cour a déjà reconnu que ces recours pouvaient en principe apporter un redressement approprié en cas de violation de l'exigence de délai raisonnable et devaient être épuisés par les requérants potentiels préalablement à la saisine de la Cour (Balakchiev c. Bulgarie (déc.), no 65187/10, 18 juin 2013, Valcheva and Abrashev c. Bulgarie (déc.), nos 6194/11 et 34887/11, 18 juin 2013).
• EGMR, 21.12.2021 - 10108/16

  SHIYANKOVA-KASAPSKA v. BULGARIA

  6194/11 and 34887/11, §§ 92-122, 18 June 2013).

 
• EGMR, 27.06.2017 - 65540/16

  ATANASOV AND APOSTOLOV v. BULGARIA

  6194/11 and 34887/11, §§ 88-91 and 122, 18 June 2013; and Stella and Others v. Italy (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 30.05.2017 - 9662/13

  TSONEV v. BULGARIA

  6194/11 and 34887/11, § 122, 18 June 2013).
• EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 44448/07

  AGONTSEV v. BULGARIA

  6194/11 and 34887/11, §§ 47-66, 18 June 2013).