Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 21.12.2006 - 72551/01 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2006,71655) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
TELIGA AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 35 Abs. 3, Art. 35 Abs. 4, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1... , Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
Preliminary objection dismissed (exhaustion) Violation of Art 6-1 Violation of Art 13 Not necessary to examine Art 37.1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award ...
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 06.11.2001 - 53430/99
FEDERATION CHRETIENNE DES TEMOINS DE JEHOVAH DE FRANCE v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 21.12.2006 - 72551/01
Taking into account that the second and the third applicants have never been parties to proceedings concerning the invalidation of the OM's property transaction, the Court concludes that they may not be regarded as victims in respect of the allegations they raise (see Fédération chrétienne des témoins de Jéhovah de France v. France (dec.), no. 53430/99, ECHR 2001-XI). - EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00
MIFSUD contre la FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 21.12.2006 - 72551/01
The existence of such a remedy must be sufficiently certain not only in theory but also in practice, failing which it will lack the requisite accessibility and effectiveness (see, inter alia, Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, ECHR 2002-VIII). - EGMR, 20.10.2005 - 30877/02
NOSOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 21.12.2006 - 72551/01
In this respect, the Court reiterates that a person cannot complain about a violation of his or her rights in the proceedings, to which he or she was not a party, despite the fact that she or he was a shareholder of the company that these proceedings concerned (see, e.g., F. Santos Lda. and Fachadas v. Portugal (dec.), no. 49020/99, 19 September 2000; Nosov v. Russia (dec.), no. 30877/02, 20 October 2005).
- EGMR, 04.10.2012 - 34545/05
BESTIYANETS c. UKRAINE
The Court has held on many occasions that the Ukrainian legislation did not and does envisage an effective and accessible remedy for complaints in respect of the length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Teliga and Others v. Ukraine, no. 72551/01, § 104, 21 December 2006, and Vashchenko v. Ukraine, no. 26864/03, § 59, 26 June 2008).