Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DRYZEK v. POLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 35 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 28.06.2007 - 76240/01

  WAGNER ET J.M.W.L. c. LUXEMBOURG

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 12285/09

  However, in special circumstances, an appellate court of final instance may be required to give fuller reasons for its judgment (see Yanakiev v. Bulgaria, no. 40476/98, § 72, 10 August 2006; Gheorghe v. Romania, no. 19215/04, § 50, 15 March 2007; Wagner and J.M.W.L. v. Luxembourg, no. 76240/01, §§ 96-97, 28 June 2007; and Velted-98 AD v. Bulgaria, no. 15239/02, § 48, 11 December 2008).
• EGMR, 18.02.1999 - 26083/94

  WAITE AND KENNEDY v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 12285/09

  The Court recalls that it is primarily for the national authorities, notably the courts, to resolve problems of interpretation of domestic legislation (see Brualla Gómez de la Torre v. Spain, 19 December 1997, § 31, RJD 1997-VIII; Waite and Kennedy v. Germany [GC], no. 26083/94, § 54, ECHR 1999-I; and Nejdet Sahin and Perihan Sahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 13279/05, § 49, 20 October 2011).
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 30544/96

  GARCÍA RUIZ v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 12285/09

  The extent to which this duty to give reasons applies may vary according to the nature of the decision and must be determined in the light of the circumstances of the case (see Ruiz Torija v. Spain, 9 December 1994, § 29, Series A no. 303-A; Hiro Balani v. Spain, 9 December 1994, § 27, Series A no. 303-B; Higgins and Others v. France, 19 February 1998, § 42, RJD 1998-I; and García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 26, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 19.04.1994 - 16034/90

  VAN DE HURK v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 12285/09

  Although Article 6 § 1 obliges courts to give reasons for their decisions, it cannot be understood as requiring a detailed answer to every argument (see Van de Hurk v. the Netherlands, 19 April 1994, § 61, Series A no. 288; and Pronina v. Ukraine, no. 63566/00, § 23, 18 July 2006).
• EGMR, 09.12.1994 - 18064/91

  HIRO BALANI v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 12285/09

  The extent to which this duty to give reasons applies may vary according to the nature of the decision and must be determined in the light of the circumstances of the case (see Ruiz Torija v. Spain, 9 December 1994, § 29, Series A no. 303-A; Hiro Balani v. Spain, 9 December 1994, § 27, Series A no. 303-B; Higgins and Others v. France, 19 February 1998, § 42, RJD 1998-I; and García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 26, ECHR 1999-I).

• EuGH, 16.11.2021 - C-748/19

  Die in Polen geltende Regelung, nach der der Justizminister, der gleichzeitig …

  Die Mitgliedstaaten können zwar durchaus ein System anwenden, nach dem Richter im dienstlichen Interesse vorübergehend an ein anderes Gericht abgeordnet werden können (vgl. in diesem Sinne EGMR, 25. Oktober 2011, Richert/Polen, CE:ECHR:2011:1025JUD005480907, § 44, und 20. März 2012, Dryzek/Polen, CE:ECHR:2012:0320DEC001228509, § 49).
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 20.05.2021 - C-748/19

  Generalanwalt Bobek: Das Unionsrecht steht der in Polen praktizierten Abordnung …

  118 Ähnlich EGMR, Urteile vom 25. Oktober 2011, Richert/Polen (CE:ECHR:2011:1025JUD005480907, § 44), und vom 20. März 2012, Dryzek/Polen (CE:ECHR:2012:0320DEC001228509, § 49).
• EGMR, 06.05.2014 - 9208/05

  LACHOWSKI v. POLAND

  The Court cannot question the national courts" interpretation except in the event of flagrant non-observance of, or arbitrariness in the application of, the domestic legislation in question (see, inter alia, Kruslin, cited above, § 29; Brualla Gómez de la Torre v. Spain, 19 December 1997, § 31, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VIII; Kopp v. Switzerland, 25 March 1998, § 59, Reports 1998-II; Société Colas Est and Others v. France, no. 37971/97, § 43, ECHR 2002-III; and, mutatis mutandis, Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, § 114, 28 November 2002; Leyla Sahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 44774/98, § 88, ECHR 2005-XI; Weber and Saravia v. Germany (dec.), no. 54934/00, 29 June 2006, § 90; Dryzek v. Poland (dec.), no. 12285/09, 20 March 2012, § 50; and Draksas v. Lithuania, no. 36662/04, § 56, 31 July 2012).