Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SEDY v. SLOVAKIA

  Art. 2, Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 17, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 35 Abs. 3, Art. 35 Abs. 4, Art. 41 MRK
  Preliminary objection partially allowed Violation of Art. 6-1 Not necessary to examine Art. 2 3 6 13 17 and P1-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.12.2006 - 72237/01

  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, 23.05.2023 - 49072/21

  PANJU c. BELGIQUE (N° 2)

  La Cour a ainsi accepté qu'aucun dommage moral ne soit versé en raison du faible enjeu du litige pour le requérant (Nardone c. Italie (déc.), no 34368/02, 25 novembre 2004, et ? edý c. Slovaquie, no 72237/01, §§ 90-92, 19 décembre 2006).
• EGMR, 14.12.2023 - 1780/22

  FÚROVÁ AND NEVEDELOVÁ v. SLOVAKIA

  It further notes that, in contrast with the case of Sedý v. Slovakia (no. 72237/01, § 89, 19 December 2006), the Constitutional Court did not blame the applicants for having prolonged the proceedings; also, the alleged specific reasons referred to by the Government (see paragraph 8 in fine above) were not mentioned at all by the Constitutional Court.
• EGMR, 21.09.2023 - 19303/20

  SARKOCY v. SLOVAKIA

  In that connection the Court reiterates that there is a strong but rebuttable presumption that excessively long proceedings will occasion non-pecuniary damage unless duly justified otherwise (Sedý v. Slovakia, no. 72237/01, § 89, 19 December 2006, with further references).

 
• EGMR, 21.09.2023 - 1971/22

  SARKOCY v. SLOVAKIA

  In that connection the Court reiterates that there is a strong but rebuttable presumption that excessively long proceedings will occasion non-pecuniary damage unless duly justified otherwise (see Sedý v. Slovakia, no. 72237/01, § 89, 19 December 2006, with further references).
• EGMR, 10.11.2022 - 4122/15

  MAGAZIN v. SERBIA

  The domestic courts will then have to justify their decision by giving sufficient reasons (see ibid., and Sedý v. Slovakia, no. 72237/01, §§ 90-92, 19 December 2006).
• EGMR, 20.05.2021 - 16008/20

  ZIROVNICKÝ v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  The domestic courts have to justify their decision by giving sufficient reasons (see Apicella v. Italy [GC], no. 64890/01, § 93, 29 March 2006, and Sedý v. Slovakia, no. 72237/01, § 89, 19 December 2006).
• EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 21603/07

  MILOSAVLJEVIC v. SERBIA

  The domestic courts will then have to justify their decision by giving sufficient reasons (ibidem; and Sedý v. Slovakia, no. 72237/01, §§ 90-92, 19 December 2006).
• EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 16019/15

  OKILJ v. SERBIA

  The domestic courts will then have to justify their decision by giving sufficient reasons (ibidem; and Sedý v. Slovakia, no. 72237/01, §§ 90-92, 19 December 2006).