Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AKSENTIJEVIC v. SERBIA

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  AKSENTIJEVIC v. SERBIA

  Art. 7, Art. 7 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 31365/96

  VARBANOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  The Court's assessment Relevant principles 29. The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untrue facts and false declarations (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000 X; Rehak v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Kerechasvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006 V; Bagheri and Maliki v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 30164/06, 15 May 2007; Poznanski and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 25101/05, 3 July 2007; Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 63, 15 September 2009; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 97, ECHR 2012; and Gross v. Switzerland [GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 72286/01

  MELNIK v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  However, even in such cases, the applicant's intention to mislead the Court must always be established with sufficient certainty (see Al-Nashif v. Bulgaria, no. 50963/99, § 89, 20 June 2002; Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 58-60, 28 March 2006; and Nold v. Germany, no. 27250/02, § 87, 29 June 2006).
• EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 67208/01

  REHÁK v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  The Court's assessment Relevant principles 29. The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untrue facts and false declarations (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000 X; Rehak v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Kerechasvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006 V; Bagheri and Maliki v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 30164/06, 15 May 2007; Poznanski and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 25101/05, 3 July 2007; Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 63, 15 September 2009; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 97, ECHR 2012; and Gross v. Switzerland [GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014).

 
• EGMR, 02.05.2006 - 5667/02

  KÉRÉTCHACHVILI c. GEORGIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  The Court's assessment Relevant principles 29. The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untrue facts and false declarations (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000 X; Rehak v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Kerechasvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006 V; Bagheri and Maliki v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 30164/06, 15 May 2007; Poznanski and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 25101/05, 3 July 2007; Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 63, 15 September 2009; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 97, ECHR 2012; and Gross v. Switzerland [GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 19.06.2006 - 23130/04

  Menschenrechtskonvention : Unzulässigkeit der Beschwerde wegen Missbrauchs des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  The submission of incomplete and thus misleading information may also amount to an abuse of the right of application, especially if the information concerns the very core of the case and no sufficient explanation has been provided for the failure to disclose that information (see Hüttner v. Germany (dec.), no. 23130/04, 19 June 2006; Kowal v. Poland (dec.), no. 2912/11, 18 September 2012; and Gross, cited above, § 28).
• EGMR, 29.06.2006 - 27250/02

  Menschrechtskonvention: Überlange Verfahrensdauer, Zivilrechtsstreit

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  However, even in such cases, the applicant's intention to mislead the Court must always be established with sufficient certainty (see Al-Nashif v. Bulgaria, no. 50963/99, § 89, 20 June 2002; Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 58-60, 28 March 2006; and Nold v. Germany, no. 27250/02, § 87, 29 June 2006).
• EGMR, 03.07.2007 - 25101/05

  M. P. u. a. gegen Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  The Court's assessment Relevant principles 29. The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untrue facts and false declarations (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000 X; Rehak v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Kerechasvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006 V; Bagheri and Maliki v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 30164/06, 15 May 2007; Poznanski and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 25101/05, 3 July 2007; Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 63, 15 September 2009; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 97, ECHR 2012; and Gross v. Switzerland [GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 14102/02

  BEKAURI v. GEORGIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  Any and all omissions on the representative's part are therefore, in principle, attributable to the applicant and may lead to the application being rejected as an abuse of the right of application (see, for example, Bekauri v. Georgia (preliminary objection), no. 14102/02, §§ 22-25, 10 April 2012, and, mutatis mutandis, Gross, cited above, § 33).
• EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 2912/11

  KOWAL v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  The submission of incomplete and thus misleading information may also amount to an abuse of the right of application, especially if the information concerns the very core of the case and no sufficient explanation has been provided for the failure to disclose that information (see Hüttner v. Germany (dec.), no. 23130/04, 19 June 2006; Kowal v. Poland (dec.), no. 2912/11, 18 September 2012; and Gross, cited above, § 28).
• EGMR, 15.05.2007 - 30164/06

  BAGHERI AND MALIKI v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2020 - 57699/13

  The Court's assessment Relevant principles 29. The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as abusive under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on untrue facts and false declarations (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 36, ECHR 2000 X; Rehak v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004; Kerechasvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 5667/02, ECHR 2006 V; Bagheri and Maliki v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 30164/06, 15 May 2007; Poznanski and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 25101/05, 3 July 2007; Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 63, 15 September 2009; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 97, ECHR 2012; and Gross v. Switzerland [GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014).