Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 18.11.2021 - 37974/20, 55887/20 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2021,46469) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BALOGH AND ADAMCO v. SLOVAKIA
Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time) (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94
PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.11.2021 - 37974/20
The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II, and Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII). - EGMR, 25.06.2020 - 44151/12
TEMPEL v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.11.2021 - 37974/20
In view of these considerations, the Court finds that the just satisfaction awarded to the applicants at the domestic level cannot be considered sufficient in the light of the Court's case-law (see Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 205-206 and 214-15, ECHR 2006-V,) even taking into account the first applicant's long term imprisonment and the lifelong prison sentence of the second applicant (see, mutatis mutandis, Tempel v. the Czech Republic, no. 44151/12, §§ 81-82, 25 June 2020). - EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96
FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.11.2021 - 37974/20
The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II, and Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).