Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ZAYIDOV v. AZERBAIJAN (No. 2)

  Preliminary objection dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Six-month period;Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general;Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ZAYIDOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Art. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 11, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (21)

• EGMR, 27.10.1993 - 14448/88

  DOMBO BEHEER B.V. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  The Court's assessment 85. The Court reiterates that the principle of adversarial proceedings and equality of arms, which is one of the elements of the broader concept of a fair hearing, requires that each party be given a reasonable opportunity to have knowledge of and comment on the observations made or evidence adduced by the other party, and to present his or her case under conditions that do not place him or her at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his or her opponent (see Krcmár and Others v. the Czech Republic, no. 35376/97, § 39, 3 March 2000, and Dombo Beheer B.V. v. the Netherlands, 27 October 1993, § 33, Series A no. 274).
• EGMR, 12.07.1988 - 10862/84

  SCHENK c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  Article 6 of the Convention 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 Schenk v. Switzerland, 12 July 1988, §§ 45-46, Series A no. 140, and García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

  CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  Having regard to the conclusions reached above under Articles 10 and 6 § 1 of the Convention (see paragraphs 74-76 and 101-102 above) and the parties' submissions, the Court considers that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of these complaints in the present case (compare Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014).

 
• EGMR, 28.05.2020 - 17895/14

  EVERS v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  The Court's task is to ascertain whether the proceedings in their entirety, including the way in which evidence and procedural decisions were taken, were fair (see Tamminen v. Finland, no. 40847/98, § 38, 15 June 2004; Mala v. Ukraine, no. 4436/07, § 47, 3 July 2014; and Evers v. Germany, no. 17895/14, § 80, 28 May 2020).
• EGMR, 03.03.2000 - 35376/97

  KRCMAR AND OTHERS v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  The Court's assessment 85. The Court reiterates that the principle of adversarial proceedings and equality of arms, which is one of the elements of the broader concept of a fair hearing, requires that each party be given a reasonable opportunity to have knowledge of and comment on the observations made or evidence adduced by the other party, and to present his or her case under conditions that do not place him or her at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his or her opponent (see Krcmár and Others v. the Czech Republic, no. 35376/97, § 39, 3 March 2000, and Dombo Beheer B.V. v. the Netherlands, 27 October 1993, § 33, Series A no. 274).
• EGMR, 16.02.2016 - 27236/05

  YEVDOKIMOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  27236/05 and 10 others, § 52, 16 February 2016; and Igranov and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 28.05.2020 - 29620/07

  FARZALIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  Lastly, the Court refers to its case-law principles concerning the right to a reasoned decision, which have been summarised in detail in, among many other authorities, Mazahir Jafarov v. Azerbaijan, (no. 39331/09, §§ 33-36, 2 April 2020) and Farzaliyev v. Azerbaijan (no. 29620/07, § 34-36, 28 May 2020).
• EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 42399/13

  IGRANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  42399/13 and 8 others, §§ 35-36, 20 March 2018).
• EGMR, 17.12.2009 - 20075/03

  SHILBERGS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  The Court has thus found a violation of Article 6 in cases in which the nature of the civil dispute, including claims concerning, inter alia, ill-treatment by the police, bad conditions of detention and defamation, was such as to justify the claimant's personal presence before the court, irrespective of whether or not he or she had been represented at the hearing (see, among other authorities, Kovalev v. Russia, no. 78145/01, § 37, 10 May 2007; Sokur v. Russia, no. 23243/03, § 35, 15 October 2009; Shilbergs v. Russia, no. 20075/03, § 111, 17 December 2009; Mokhov v. Russia, no. 28245/04, §§ 46-47, 4 March 2010; Insanov v. Azerbaijan, no. 16133/08, § 145, 14 March 2013; Yevdokimov and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 12.06.2012 - 19673/03

  GRYAZNOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2022 - 5386/10

  Nevertheless, any restriction imposed on the right of a party to civil proceedings to call witnesses and to adduce other evidence in support of his or her case must be consistent with the requirements of a fair trial within the meaning of paragraph 1 of that Article, including the principle of equality of arms (see Gryaznov v. Russia, no. 19673/03, § 57, 12 June 2012, and Gillissen v. the Netherlands, no. 39966/09, § 50, 15 March 2016).
• EGMR, 04.03.2010 - 28245/04

  MOKHOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.10.2009 - 23243/03

  SOKUR v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 03.07.2014 - 4436/07

  MALA v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 03.07.2007 - 9460/03

  TAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 02.04.2020 - 39331/09

  MAZAHIR JAFAROV v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72

  SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 11948/08

  ZAYIDOV v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 28691/05

  SARIGÜL c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 25.01.2011 - 56975/09

  Christopher Donaldson ./. Vereinigtes Königreich
• EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 16363/07

  DZIDZAVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 09.03.2010 - 36882/05

  NILSEN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

• EuGH, 02.03.2023 - C-268/21

  Norra Stockholm Bygg

  Nach ständiger Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte ist es angesichts des hohen Ranges, den das Recht auf ein faires Verfahren in einer demokratischen Gesellschaft einnimmt, wesentlich, dass der Rechtsuchende die Möglichkeit hat, sein Anliegen vor einem Gericht sachgerecht zu verteidigen, und dass zwischen den Parteien Waffengleichheit besteht (vgl. in diesem Sinne EGMR, 24. Juni 2022, Zayidov/Aserbaidschan (Nr. 2), CE:ECHR:2022:0324JUD000538610, § 87 und die dort angeführte Rechtsprechung).
• EGMR, 12.03.2024 - 49443/17

  BONEV v. BULGARIA

  As to the merits, the applicable general principles have recently been summarised in Zayidov v. Azerbaijan (no. 2) (no. 5386/10, § 91, 24 March 2022, with further references).
• EGMR, 16.05.2023 - 23721/11

  AYDIN AND OTHERS v. TÜRKIYE

  In that connection, the Court reiterates that Article 6 of the Convention 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, among many other authorities, García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I, and, more recently, Zayidov v. Azerbaijan (no. 2), no. 5386/10, § 86, 24 March 2022).

 
• EGMR, 03.10.2023 - 18428/18

  DUMITRU c. ROUMANIE

  En outre, la Cour constate qu'il ressort du dossier que l'arrêt définitif du 2 août 2017 du tribunal départemental a été motivé, répondant aux arguments essentiels de la requérante, et a confirmé le jugement rendu en première instance (voir, pour un rappel des principes, Zayidov c. Azerbaïdjan (no 2), no 5386/10, § 91, 24 mars 2022).
• EGMR, 30.06.2022 - 20755/08

  AZADLIQ AND ZAYIDOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  By a presidential pardon of 17 March 2010, he was released from serving the remainder of his sentence (for more details, see Zayidov v. Azerbaijan, no. 11948/08, §§ 7-34, 20 February 2014, and Zayidov v. Azerbaijan (no. 2), no. 5386/10, §§ 5 et seq., 24 March 2022).
• EGMR, 03.10.2023 - 63592/19

  SALONA GRADITELJ D.D. v. CROATIA

  ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 11. The Court refers to its case-law principles concerning the right to a reasoned decision, which have been summarised, inter alia, in Zayidov v. Azerbaijan (no. 2), no. 5386/10, § 91, 24 March 2022.
• EGMR - 37188/19 (anhängig)

  QOBILOVA AND OTHERS v. TÜRKIYE

  (b) Having particular regard to the fact that the Constitutional Court provided no explanation in declaring their individual applications inadmissible, did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaints under Articles 3 of the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, G.B. and Others v. Turkey, cited above, §§ 118-138, and Zayidov v. Azerbaijan (no. 2), no. 5386/10, § 91, 24 March 2022))? The Government are invited to respond to the claim that the time taken by the Constitutional Court to examine the applicants' individual application had been protracted.
• EGMR - 35931/19 (anhängig)

  NEKRASOVA v. UKRAINE

  Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of her civil rights and obligations in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, regard being had to her alleged inability to personally appear before the Chervonozavodskyy District Court in Kharkiv (compare Pönkä v. Estonia, no. 64160/11, §§ 30-40, 8 November 2016, and Zayidov v. Azerbaijan (no. 2), no. 5386/10, §§ 85-102, 24 March 2022)?.