Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 45756/05 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2010,64058) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
NOVIKAS v. LITHUANIA
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (6)
- EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 33354/96
Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Mitangeklagten als Zeugen im Sinne der …
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 45756/05
In regard to the circumstances of the present case, the Court observes that in contrario to Lucà v. Italy (no. 33354/96, ECHR 2001-II) the statements made by D.K. and S.N. were not the sole evidence on which the domestic courts' findings were based (see paragraphs 8 and 9 above).The Court has nevertheless to ascertain whether the proceedings considered as a whole were fair, as required by Article 6 § 1 (see García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, §§ 28-29, ECHR 1999-I; Lucà v. Italy, no. 33354/96, § 38, ECHR 2001-II), which in the case of criminal proceedings includes the observance of the presumption of innocence.
- EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 30544/96
GARCÍA RUIZ v. SPAIN
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 45756/05
The Court has nevertheless to ascertain whether the proceedings considered as a whole were fair, as required by Article 6 § 1 (see García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, §§ 28-29, ECHR 1999-I; Lucà v. Italy, no. 33354/96, § 38, ECHR 2001-II), which in the case of criminal proceedings includes the observance of the presumption of innocence. - EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00
MIFSUD contre la FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 45756/05
The existence of such remedies must be sufficiently certain not only in theory but also in practice, failing which they will lack the requisite accessibility and effectiveness (see, inter alia, Vernillo v. France, 20 February 1991, § 27, Series A no. 198; Dalia v. France, 19 February 1998, § 38, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, ECHR 2002-VIII).
- EGMR, 24.11.1986 - 9120/80
UNTERPERTINGER v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 45756/05
The corollary of that, however, is that where a conviction is based solely or to a decisive degree on depositions which have been made by a person whom the accused has had no opportunity to examine or to have examined, whether during the investigation or at the trial, the rights of the defence may thereby be restricted to an extent which is incompatible with the guarantees provided by Article 6 (see Unterpertinger v. Austria, judgment of 24 November 1986, Series A no. 110, pp. 14-15, §§ 31-33; Saïdi v. France, judgment of 20 September 1993, Series A no. 261-C, pp. 56-57, §§ 43-44; Van Mechelen and Others, cited above, § 55). - EGMR, 26.04.1991 - 12398/86
ASCH v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 45756/05
Consequently, the complaint will be examined under the two provisions taken together (see, among other authorities, Asch v. Austria, judgment of 26 April 1991, Series A no. 203, p. 10, § 25). - EGMR, 02.07.2002 - 34209/96
S.N. v. SWEDEN
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 45756/05
In the circumstances of the case, the measures taken in that respect may be considered to have been sufficient to enable the applicant to challenge such testimony and its credibility in the course of the criminal proceedings (see mutatis mutandis S.N. v. Sweden, no. 34209/96, § 52, ECHR 2002-V).