Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 19.11.2015 - 46998/08   

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen.

Sie haben noch kein Nutzerkonto? In weniger als einer Minute ist es eingerichtet und Sie können sofort diese und weitere kostenlose Zusatzfunktionen nutzen.

| | Was ist die Merkfunktion?
Ablegen in
Benachrichtigen, wenn:




 
Alle auswählen
 

Zitiervorschläge

https://dejure.org/2015,34070
EGMR, 19.11.2015 - 46998/08 (https://dejure.org/2015,34070)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 19.11.2015 - 46998/08 (https://dejure.org/2015,34070)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 19. November 2015 - 46998/08 (https://dejure.org/2015,34070)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,34070) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    MIKHAYLOVA v. RUSSIA

    Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Criminal charge) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial;Article 6-3-c - Free legal assistance);Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Criminal charge) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial;Article 6-3-c - Free legal assistance);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)

Besprechungen u.ä.

  • fau.de PDF (Entscheidungsbesprechung)

    Anwendung von Art. 6 und 7 EMRK auf formelles Ordnungswidrigkeitenrecht

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (13)

  • EGMR, 20.09.2016 - 926/08

    KARELIN v. RUSSIA

    A recent assessment of certain problems arising in the CAO proceedings is available in the 2014 report compiled by the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Russian Federation (as quoted in Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, § 40, 19 November 2015).
  • EGMR, 10.04.2018 - 54381/08

    TSVETKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    In this connection he referred to Mikhaylova v. Russia (no. 46998/08, 19 November 2015).
  • EGMR, 02.02.2017 - 29580/12

    NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA

    The Court has previously held that the offence set out in Article 19.3 of the Code of the Administrative Offences should be classified as "criminal" for the purposes of the Convention (see Malofeyeva, cited above, §§ 99-101; Nemtsov v. Russia, no. 1774/11, § 83, 31 July 2014; Navalnyy and Yashin, cited above, § 78; and Frumkin, cited above, §§ 154-56), as should the offence under Article 20.2 of the Code (see Kasparov and Others, cited above, §§ 37-45, and Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, §§ 57-69, 19 November 2015).
  • EGMR, 22.11.2018 - 18297/13

    D.L. v. GERMANY

    Er weist erneut darauf hin, dass die in Artikel 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c der Konvention verankerten Rechte Bestandteile des Begriffs des fairen Verfahrens im Strafprozess im Sinne von Artikel 6 Abs. 1 sind (siehe Mikhaylova./. Russland, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 46998/08, Rdnr. 76, 19 November 2015), und wird die Rüge des Beschwerdeführers nach beiden Bestimmungen im Zusammenhang prüfen.
  • EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 51988/07

    KASPAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (No. 2)

    The Court has previously held that the offence set out in Article 19.3 of the Code of the Administrative Offences should be classified as "criminal" for the purposes of the Convention (see Malofeyeva, cited above, §§ 99-101; Nemtsov v. Russia, no. 1774/11, § 83, 31 July 2014; and Navalnyy and Yashin, cited above, § 78), as should the offence under Article 20.2 of the Code (see Kasparov and Others, cited above, §§ 37-45; Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, §§ 57-69, 19 November 2015; and Frumkin, cited above, §§ 154-56).
  • EGMR, 17.04.2018 - 35000/13

    TSUKANOV AND TORCHINSKIY v. RUSSIA

    Second, the Court has previously found that Article 6 of the Convention was applicable under its criminal limb to proceedings involving charges under Article 20.2 of the CAO punishable by a fine (see Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, § 69, 19 November 2015).
  • EGMR, 28.08.2018 - 12307/16

    VYACHESLAV KORCHAGIN v. RUSSIA

    Having regard to the fact that the applicant was accused of an "offence" under this Code and the imputed facts concerned the protection of public health (see paragraph 9 above), the punitive nature of the sentence and its own findings in earlier cases (see Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, §§ 57-65, 19 November 2015 with further references; Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, § 42, 20 September 2016; and paragraph 32 above; see also Flisar v. Slovenia, no. 3127/09, §§ 17 and 26, 29 September 2011, and Nicoleta Gheorghe v. Romania, no. 23470/05, §§ 25-26, 3 April 2012), the Court concludes that the criminal limb of Article 6 of the Convention was applicable.
  • EGMR, 27.06.2017 - 19259/13

    KHATSUKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    The examination of this application on the merits would not bring any new elements to the Court's existing case-law (see Burov v. Moldova (dec.), no. 38875/03, § 33, 14 June 2011, and, by contrast, Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, § 49, 19 November 2015).
  • EGMR, 18.07.2017 - 32151/09

    YELISEYEV v. RUSSIA

    Even accepting, regard being had to its earlier case-law concerning administrative offences entailing imposition of a monetary fine (see Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, §§ 50-69, 19 November 2015) the applicant's argument that the proceedings against him constituted criminal proceedings which fall within the ambit of Article 6 of the Convention, it finds that the applicant's complaint is, in any event, inadmissible for the reasons set out below.
  • EGMR, 04.07.2017 - 37285/12

    KHUBIYEV v. RUSSIA

    The examination of this application on the merits would not bring any new elements to the Court's existing case-law (see Burov v. Moldova (dec.), no. 38875/03, § 33, 14 June 2011, and, by contrast, Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, § 49, 19 November 2015).
  • EGMR - 53980/15 (anhängig)

    H.R. v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 27.06.2017 - 1850/07

    MIKHAYLENKO v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 41846/17 (anhängig)

    VINGORODOV v. RUSSIA

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht