Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KAURA v. FINLAND

  (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 40350/05
• EGMR, 06.12.2012 - 40350/05
• EGMR - 40350/05

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

  PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 40350/05

  Moreover, the Contracting States are under a duty to organise their legal systems in such a way that their courts can meet the requirements of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, including the obligation to decide cases within a reasonable time (see Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-II).
• EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 11855/85

  H?KANSSON AND STURESSON v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 40350/05

  A waiver may be explicit or tacit, in the latter case for example by refraining from submitting or maintaining a request for a hearing (see, among other authorities, Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, 21 February 1990, § 66, Series A no. 171-A; and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, § 58, Series A no. 263).
• EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89

  SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 40350/05

  A waiver may be explicit or tacit, in the latter case for example by refraining from submitting or maintaining a request for a hearing (see, among other authorities, Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, 21 February 1990, § 66, Series A no. 171-A; and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, § 58, Series A no. 263).

 
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 40350/05

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 29.10.1991 - 11826/85

  HELMERS c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 40350/05

  However, the absence of a hearing before a second or third instance may be justified by the special features of the proceedings at issue, provided a hearing has been held at first instance (see Helmers v. Sweden, 29 October 1991, § 36, Series A no. 212-A).
• EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 16922/90

  FISCHER c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 40350/05

  A hearing may not be necessary, for example when it raises no question of fact or law which cannot be adequately resolved on the basis of the case file and the parties" written observations (see, inter alia, Döry v. Sweden, no. 28394/95, § 37, 12 November 2002; Lundevall v. Sweden, no. 38629/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; Salomonsson v. Sweden, no. 38978/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; and mutatis mutandis, Fredin v. Sweden (no. 2), 23 February 1994, §§ 21-22, Series A no. 283-A; and Fischer v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 44, Series A no. 312).
• EGMR, 23.02.1994 - 18928/91

  FREDIN c. SUÈDE (N° 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 40350/05

  A hearing may not be necessary, for example when it raises no question of fact or law which cannot be adequately resolved on the basis of the case file and the parties" written observations (see, inter alia, Döry v. Sweden, no. 28394/95, § 37, 12 November 2002; Lundevall v. Sweden, no. 38629/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; Salomonsson v. Sweden, no. 38978/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; and mutatis mutandis, Fredin v. Sweden (no. 2), 23 February 1994, §§ 21-22, Series A no. 283-A; and Fischer v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 44, Series A no. 312).