Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 22.05.1998 - 27053/95 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
VASILESCU c. ROUMANIE
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 41 MRK
Exception préliminaire rejetée (forclusion) Violation de l'art. 6-1 Violation de P1-1 Non-lieu à examiner l'art. 8 Non-lieu à examiner l'art. 13 Dommage matériel - réparation pécuniaire Préjudice moral - réparation pécuniaire Remboursement frais et dépens - ... - Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
VASILESCU v. ROMANIA
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 41 MRK
Preliminary objection rejected (estoppel) Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of P1-1 Not necessary to examine Art. 8 Not necessary to examine Art. 13 Pecuniary damage - financial award Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses award - Convention ...
Verfahrensgang
- EKMR, 07.03.1996 - 27053/95
- EGMR, 22.05.1998 - 27053/95
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75
SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.1998 - 27053/95
Since the Convention is intended to safeguard rights that are "practical and effective", it has to be ascertained whether the situation complained of amounted to a de facto confiscation (see, among other authorities and mutatis mutandis, the Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden judgment of 23 September 1982, Series A no. 52, p. 24, § 63, and the Papamichalopoulos and Others judgment cited above, p. 69, § 42). - EGMR, 27.08.1991 - 13057/87
DEMICOLI v. MALTA
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.1998 - 27053/95
According to its case-law, the Court may order the reimbursement of legal costs that have been actually and necessarily incurred in order to prevent or rectify, through the domestic legal system, a violation of the Convention and to have the same established by the Commission and later by the Court and to obtain redress therefor; such costs must also be reasonable as to quantum (see, among other authorities, the Demicoli v. Malta judgment of 27 August 1991, Series A no. 210, p. 20, § 49). - EGMR, 24.11.1994 - 15287/89
BEAUMARTIN c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.1998 - 27053/95
The Court reiterates that only an institution that has full jurisdiction and satisfies a number of requirements, such as independence of the executive and also of the parties, merits the description "tribunal" within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 (see, among other authorities, the Beaumartin v. France judgment of 24 November 1994, Series A no. 296-B, p. 63, § 38). - EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14556/89
PAPAMICHALOPOULOS ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.1998 - 27053/95
However, the Court notes that the applicant's complaint relates to a continuing situation, which still obtains at the present time (see, mutatis mutandis, the Papamichalopoulos and Others v. Greece judgment of 24 June 1993, Series A no. 260-B, p. 69, § 40, and the Loizidou v. Turkey judgment of 18 December 1996 (merits), Reports 1996-VI, p. 2230, § 41).