Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  JURESA v. CROATIA

  No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  JURESA v. CROATIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 12.04.2011 - 16261/08

  HOARE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 24079/11

  At this point it is important to reiterate that courts may depart from their well-established case-law, provided they give good and cogent reasons for doing so (see Hoare v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 16261/08, § 54, 12 April 2011).
• EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78

  ASHINGDANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 24079/11

  Furthermore, a limitation will not be compatible with Article 6 § 1 if it does not pursue a legitimate aim and if there is not a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought (see, for example, Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, § 57, Series A no. 93; Stubbings and Others v. the United Kingdom, 22 October 1996, § 50, Reports 1996-IV; and Zubac, cited above, § 78).
• EGMR, 02.11.2010 - 38155/02

  STEFANICA AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 24079/11

  This, inter alia, guarantees a certain stability in legal situations and contributes to public confidence in the courts (see, mutatis mutandis, Stefanica and Others v. Romania, no. 38155/02, § 38, 2 November 2011).

 
• EGMR, 22.09.1994 - 13616/88

  HENTRICH v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 24079/11

  The purpose of Article 35 is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, for example, Gherghina, cited above, § 84; Hentrich v. France, 22 September 1994, § 33, Series A no. 296-A; Remli v. France, 23 April 1996, § 33, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-II; and Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], no. 37685/10, § 117, 20 March 2018).
• EGMR, 18.12.2008 - 20153/04

  UNEDIC c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 24079/11

  The Court has pointed out that there is no acquired right to consistency of case-law (see Unédic v. France, no. 20153/04, § 74, 18 December 2008).
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 24079/11

  The right of access, namely the right to institute proceedings before a court in civil matters, constitutes one aspect of this "right to court" (see, notably, Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, §§ 28-36, Series A no. 18; and Zubac v. Croatia [GC], no. 40160/12, § 76, 5 April 2018).
• EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 37685/10

  RADOMILJA AND OTHERS v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 24079/11

  37685/10 and 22768/12, § 149, ECHR 2018; and Zubac v. Croatia [GC], no. 40160/12, § 81, 5 April 2018).
• EGMR, 18.02.1999 - 26083/94

  WAITE AND KENNEDY v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.05.2018 - 24079/11

  Should the Court want to go further in its analysis, it could examine whether the effects of the Supreme Court's interpretation of domestic law are compatible with the Convention (see, among other authorities, Waite and Kennedy v. Germany [GC], no. 26083/94, § 54, ECHR 1999-I; Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos.