Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 38652/15 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,14725) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
CIESLA v. POLAND
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 30544/96
GARCÍA RUIZ v. SPAIN
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 38652/15
Moreover, while Article 6 of the Convention guarantees the right to a fair hearing, it does not lay down any rules on the admissibility of evidence or the way it should be assessed, which are therefore primarily matters for regulation by national law and the national courts (see Garcia Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I). - EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 25716/94
JANOWSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 38652/15
In particular, it must determine whether the interference in issue was "proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued" and whether the reasons adduced by the national authorities to justify it are "relevant and sufficient" (see Janowski v. Poland [GC], no. 25716/94, § 30(iii), ECHR 1999-I with further references, and MGN Limited v. the United Kingdom, no. 39401/04, § 139, 18 January 2011). - EGMR, 22.06.2010 - 41029/06
KURLOWICZ v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 38652/15
It should be also noted that the criminal proceedings against the applicant originated in a private bill of indictment; no criminal proceedings on a public indictment were instituted or even envisaged against him (compare and contrast Kurlowicz v. Poland, no. 41029/06 § 54, 22 June 2010, and Dlugolecki v. Poland, no. 23806/03 § 47, 24 February 2009). - EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 43587/09
LOPUCH v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 38652/15
As regards the test of "necessity in the democratic society", the relevant general principles are set out in paragraphs 54-58 of the Court's judgment in the case Lopuch v. Poland, no. 43587/09, 24 July 2012.
- EGMR, 12.12.2017 - 68561/13
WRONA v. POLAND
It should therefore be determined whether the interference complained of was prescribed by law, whether it pursued one or more of the legitimate aims set out in that paragraph and whether it was necessary in a democratic society in order to achieve those aims (see CumpÇ?nÇ? and MazÇ?re v. Romania [GC], no. 33348/96, § 85, ECHR 2004-XI, and Ciesla v. Poland (dec.), no. 38652/15, § 15, 24 January 2017).