Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LUBINA v. SLOVAKIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - domestic and Convention proceedings (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.09.2006 - 77688/01

  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 applicant and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 28.04.2004 - 56679/00

  AZINAS c. CHYPRE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.09.2006 - 77688/01

  The Court recalls that the rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies laid down in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention requires that the complaints intended to be made subsequently at the international level should have been aired before the appropriate domestic courts, at least in substance and in compliance with the formal requirements laid down in domestic law Azinas v. Cyprus [GC], no. 56679/00, § 38, ECHR 2004-III).

• EGMR, 22.11.2011 - 2243/10

  CURMI v. MALTA

  The Court has previously rejected applications for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies where the applicant, who was represented by a lawyer, failed to lodge his constitutional complaint in accordance with the applicable procedural rules and established practice (Obluk v. Slovakia, no. 69484/01, § 62, 20 June 2006) or had not made use of the constitutional remedy in accordance with the formal requirements, as interpreted and applied by the Constitutional Court (see Lubina v. Slovakia, no. 77688/01, § 63, 19 September 2006).
• EGMR, 10.11.2009 - 42583/06

  SCHEMBRI AND OTHERS v. MALTA

  The Court has previously rejected applications for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies where the applicant, who was represented by a lawyer, failed to lodge his constitutional complaint in accordance with the applicable procedural rules and established practice (Obluk v. Slovakia, no. 69484/01, § 62, 20 June 2006) or had not made use of the constitutional remedy in accordance with the formal requirements, as interpreted and applied by the Constitutional Court (see Lubina v. Slovakia, no. 77688/01, § 63, 19 September 2006).
• EGMR, 12.10.2021 - 46341/17

  SLOVDAN, SPOL. S R.O. v. SLOVAKIA

  54252/07 and 14 others, § 22, ECHR 2009; and Lubina v. Slovakia, no. 77688/01, §§ 46-47, 19 September 2006).
• EGMR, 09.12.2014 - 69720/11

  KNOESS v. MALTA

  The Court has previously rejected applications on the grounds of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies in cases where an applicant who was represented by a lawyer had failed to lodge a constitutional complaint in accordance with the applicable procedural rules and established practice (see Obluk v. Slovakia, no. 69484/01, § 62, 20 June 2006) or had not made use of a constitutional remedy in accordance with the formal requirements as interpreted and applied by the Constitutional Court (see Lubina v. Slovakia, no. 77688/01, § 63, 19 September 2006, and Schembri and Others v. Malta, no. 42583/06, § 49, 10 November 2009).