Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ANTIA AND KHUPENIA v. GEORGIA

  Violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Nullum crimen sine lege) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ANTIA AND KHUPENIA v. GEORGIA

  Art. 7, Art. 7 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 22.06.2000 - 32492/96

  COEME AND OTHERS v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2020 - 7523/10

  Limitation periods are a common feature of the domestic legal systems of the Contracting States and serve several purposes, including that of ensuring legal certainty (see Coëme and Others v. Belgium, nos. 32492/96 and 4 others, § 146, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 24360/04

  GIURAN v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2020 - 7523/10

  As to the parties" arguments concerning the question of whether the applicants had suffered a significant disadvantage in view of the fact that their sentence had been set aside and their criminal record had been expunged, the Court notes that the admissibility criterion set forth in Article 35 § 3 (b) of the Convention is applicable only in the event that the applicant has suffered no significant disadvantage and provided that the two safeguard clauses contained in the same provision are respected (see Giuran v. Romania, no. 24360/04, § 24, ECHR 2011 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 02.06.2015 - 2140/13

  N.Z. v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2020 - 7523/10

  Therefore, noting that the application, which was introduced within six months of the final domestic decision, was accompanied by a power of attorney duly signed by the applicants and their representative (see paragraph 17 above), the Court finds that it was submitted to the Court by an authorised representative and therefore in time (contrast and compare N.Z. v. Croatia (dec.) [Committee], no. 2140/13, §§ 23-24, 2 June 2015, with further references).
• EGMR, 05.09.2017 - 46661/09

  BOZKAYA v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.06.2020 - 7523/10

  Furthermore, the Court notes that the Supreme Court proceeded with the applicants" conviction without addressing at all the question of a waiver, if indeed there had been one (see, mutatis mutandis, Bozkaya v. Turkey, no. 46661/09, § 53, 5 September 2017).

• EGMR, 03.11.2022 - 49812/09

  VEGOTEX INTERNATIONAL S.A. c. BELGIQUE

  À la différence des conclusions auxquelles elle était parvenue dans ces affaires, toutefois, la Cour a conclu à la violation de l'article 7 dans une affaire récente où les requérants avaient été condamnés pour une infraction prescrite (Antia et Khupenia c. Géorgie, no 7523/10, §§ 38-43, 18 juin 2020).
• EGMR, 31.05.2022 - 48784/20

  GALEANO PEÑAS v. SPAIN

  It should be construed and applied, as follows from its object and purpose, in such a way as to provide effective safeguards against arbitrary prosecution, conviction and punishment (see Del Río Prada v. Spain [GC], no. 42750/09, § 77, ECHR 2013, and Antia and Khupenia v. Georgia, no. 7523/10, § 35, 18 June 2020).
• EGMR - 382/24 (anhängig)

  KHAZARADZE AND JAPARIDZE v. GEORGIA and 1 other application

  2.1 In this connection, having regard to the relevant legal provisions applicable at the material time (as well as the judicial practice), should the statute of limitation be rather understood as a substantive concept - resulting in the offence being erased - or more of a procedural one - merely setting down certain preconditions for the prosecution and trial (compare Orlen Lietuva Ltd. v. Lithuania, no. 45849/13, § 97, 29 January 2019, with further references therein, and Antia and Khupenia, no. 7523/10, §§ 38-43, 18 June 2020)?.