Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 19.01.2010 - 9332/02 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2010,62200) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
LAZARESCU v. ROMANIA
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 3, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 3 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 31365/96
VARBANOV v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2010 - 9332/02
The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untruths (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Popov v. Moldova, no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004, and Keretchashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, 2 May 2006) or if incomplete and therefore misleading information is submitted to the Court (see Hüttner v. Germany (dec.), no. 23130/04, 9 June 2006). - EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 67208/01
REHÁK v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2010 - 9332/02
The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untruths (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Popov v. Moldova, no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004, and Keretchashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, 2 May 2006) or if incomplete and therefore misleading information is submitted to the Court (see Hüttner v. Germany (dec.), no. 23130/04, 9 June 2006). - EGMR, 18.01.2005 - 74153/01
POPOV v. MOLDOVA (No. 1)
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2010 - 9332/02
The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untruths (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Popov v. Moldova, no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004, and Keretchashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, 2 May 2006) or if incomplete and therefore misleading information is submitted to the Court (see Hüttner v. Germany (dec.), no. 23130/04, 9 June 2006). - EGMR, 02.05.2006 - 5667/02
KÉRÉTCHACHVILI c. GEORGIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2010 - 9332/02
The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untruths (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Popov v. Moldova, no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004, and Keretchashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, 2 May 2006) or if incomplete and therefore misleading information is submitted to the Court (see Hüttner v. Germany (dec.), no. 23130/04, 9 June 2006). - EGMR, 19.06.2006 - 23130/04
Menschenrechtskonvention : Unzulässigkeit der Beschwerde wegen Missbrauchs des …
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2010 - 9332/02
The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untruths (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000-X; Popov v. Moldova, no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004, and Keretchashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, 2 May 2006) or if incomplete and therefore misleading information is submitted to the Court (see Hüttner v. Germany (dec.), no. 23130/04, 9 June 2006).
- EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 36363/18
ARSLANBAS c. TURQUIE
En outre, la falsification des documents adressés à la Cour constitue l'exemple le plus grave et caractérisé de l'abus du droit de recours individuel au sens de l'article 35 § 3 a) de la Convention (Miroļubovs et autres, précité, § 63, Poznanski et autres c. Allemagne (déc.), no 25101/05, 3 juillet 2007, et Lazarescu c. Roumanie (déc.), no 9332/02, § 36, 19 janvier 2010). - EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 45340/18
ÖZYÜREK c. TURQUIE
En outre, la falsification des documents adressés à la Cour constitue l'exemple le plus grave et caractérisé de l'abus du droit de recours individuel au sens de l'article 35 § 3 a) de la Convention (Miroļubovs et autres, précité, § 63, Poznanski et autres c. Allemagne (déc.), no 25101/05, 3 juillet 2007, et Lazarescu c. Roumanie (déc.), no 9332/02, § 36, 19 janvier 2010).