Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21, 345/21, 6321/21, 9227/21 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
FABBRI AND OTHERS v. SAN MARINO
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court;Civil rights and obligations;Determination (civil));Pecuniary damage - ...
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (13)
- EGMR, 18.03.2021 - 24340/07
PETRELLA c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21
However, in cases where at the stage of the preliminary investigation there was no possibility to join the proceedings as a civil party in accordance with domestic law, but nevertheless injured parties could exercise rights and powers expressly afforded to them by law, and had actually done so, the Court concluded that the civil limb of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention was applicable to the criminal proceedings in which the applicants participated as an injured party but not as a civil party (see Sottani v. Italy (dec.), no. 26775/02, ECHR 2005-III (extracts), Patrono, Cascini and Stefanelli v. Italy no. 10180/04, §§ 31-33, 20 April 2006, Arnoldi, cited above, §§ 25-44, and more recently, Petrella v. Italy, no. 24340/07, § 23, 18 March 2021).In this regard, the majority rely on the Chamber judgment in Petrella v. Italy (no. 24340/07, 18 March 2021).
- EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70
GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21
In this way, Article 6 § 1 embodies the "right to a court", of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, is one particular aspect (see, among other authorities, Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 36, Series A no. 18; Al-Dulimi and Montana Management Inc. v. Switzerland [GC], no. 5809/08, § 126, 21 June 2016; and Naït-Liman v. Switzerland [GC], no. 51357/07, § 113, 15 March 2018).As the Court stated in Golder v. the United Kingdom (21 February 1975, Series A no. 18), the principle whereby a civil claim must be capable of being submitted to a judge for determination ranks as one of the universally recognised fundamental principles of law.
- EGMR, 25.06.2019 - 41720/13
NICOLAE VIRGILIU TANASE c. ROUMANIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21
Therefore, Article 6 applies to proceedings involving civil-party complaints from the moment the complainant is joined as a civil party, unless he or she has waived the right to reparation in an unequivocal manner (ibid. § 25, and Florin Ionescu v. Romania, no. 24916/05, § 55, 24 May 2011), even during the preliminary investigation stage taken on its own (see Nicolae Virgiliu Tanase v. Romania [GC], no. 41720/13, § 207, 25 June 2019).Firstly, we would point out that the Grand Chamber of the Court has quite recently addressed the issue in the case of Nicolae Virgiliu Tanase v. Romania ([GC], no. 41720/13, 25 June 2019), reaching the conclusion that the right of access to a court had not been violated.
- EGMR, 12.02.2004 - 47287/99
PEREZ c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21
To fall within the scope of the Convention such right must be indissociable from the victim's exercise of a right to bring civil proceedings in domestic law, even if only to secure symbolic reparation or to protect a civil right such as the right to a "good reputation" (see Perez v. France [GC], no. 47287/99, § 70, ECHR 2004-I, and Gorou v. Greece (no. 2) [GC], no. 12686/03, § 24, 20 March 2009).While it is true that the Court has held that Article 6 applies to criminal proceedings involving civil-party claims from the time when the complainant is joined as a civil party (unless there has been a valid waiver of the right), the fact remains that the leading cases cited in this respect (Perez v. France [GC], no. 47287/99, ECHR 2004-I, and Gorou v. Greece (no. 2) [GC], no. 12686/03, 20 March 2009) did not concern situations where the criminal investigation had produced no findings at all.
- EGMR, 07.04.2015 - 6884/11
Polizeigewalt bei G8 in Genua 2001: Italien verurteilt
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21
Secondly, the Convention imposes a positive obligation on States to conduct criminal investigations in limited sets of circumstances only, namely in the context of the procedural obligations arising under the substantive provisions protecting the core rights, in particular Articles 2, 3 and 4 of the Convention as well as some of the most serious violations of personal integrity under Article 8. In this respect, it is also to be borne in mind that duties of investigation arising under those substantive provisions are wider than the specific duties to conduct criminal investigations (see, for instance, Nicolae Virgiliu Tanase, cited above, §§ 157-159; Cestaro v. Italy; no. 6884/11, §§ 204-209, 7 April 2015; Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, no. 25965/04, § 285, ECHR 2010 (extracts); and Söderman v. Sweden [GC], no. 5786/08, §§ 81-85, ECHR 2013). - EGMR, 15.07.2003 - 33400/96
ERNST ET AUTRES c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21
In cases where the applicants had at their disposal accessible and effective avenues for their civil claims, it found that their right of access to a court had not been infringed (see Assenov and Others, cited above, § 112; Ernst and Others v. Belgium, no. 33400/96, §§ 54-55, 15 July 2003; Moldovan and Others v. Romania (no. 2), nos. - EGMR, 12.07.2005 - 64320/01
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21
41138/98 and 64320/01, §§ 119-22, ECHR 2005-VII (extracts); Forum Maritime S.A. v. Romania, nos. - EGMR, 25.06.2013 - 24133/03
ASSOCIATION DES PERSONNES VICTIMES DU SYSTEME S.C. ROMPETROL S.A. ET S.C. GEOMIN …
- EGMR, 29.01.2013 - 5663/04
BOROBAR AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
- EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94
Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21
The purpose of this rule is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, among other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V). - EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 24916/05
FLORIN IONESCU v. ROMANIA
- EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 26775/02
SOTTANI c. ITALIE
- EGMR, 28.10.2021 - 23264/18
CARMELINA MICALLEF v. MALTA