Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  WYSOCZANSKI v. POLAND

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (11)

• EGMR, 23.06.1981 - 6878/75

  LE COMPTE, VAN LEUVEN ET DE MEYERE c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  The principle that a tribunal shall be presumed to be free of personal prejudice or partiality is long-established in the case-law of the Court (see, for example, Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium, 23 June 1981, § 58, Series A no. 43).
• EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72

  HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  Such are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" (see Handyside v. the United Kingdom, 7 December 1976, § 49, Series A no. 24; Donaldson v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no.56975/09, § 27, 25 January 2011; and Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 48876/08, § 100, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 26.10.1984 - 9186/80

  DE CUBBER v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  As regards the type of proof required, the Court has, for example, sought to ascertain whether a judge has displayed hostility or ill will or has arranged to have a case assigned to himself for personal reasons (see De Cubber v. Belgium, 26 October 1984, § 25, Series A no. 86).

 
• EGMR, 24.05.1989 - 10486/83

  HAUSCHILDT c. DANEMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  In applying the subjective test, the Court has consistently held that the personal impartiality of a judge must be presumed until there is proof to the contrary (see Hauschildt v. Denmark, 24 May 1989, § 47, Series A no. 154).
• EGMR, 01.10.1982 - 8692/79

  PIERSACK v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  The Court has thus distinguished between a subjective approach, that is to say endeavouring to ascertain the personal conviction or interest of a given judge in a particular case, and an objective approach, that is to say determining whether he or she offered sufficient guarantees to exclude any legitimate doubt in this connection (see Piersack v. Belgium, 1 October 1982, § 30, Series A no. 53, and Grieves v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 57067/00, § 69, 16 December 2003).
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 25716/94

  JANOWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  The review under the Convention is confined to the question whether the measures taken on the national level are, in the light of the case as a whole, justifiable in principle and proportionate 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, ECHR 1999-I, and MGN Limited v. the United Kingdom, no. 39401/04, § 139, 18 January 2011).
• EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02

  LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  An individual taking part in a public debate on a matter of general concern is allowed to have recourse to a degree of exaggeration or even provocation, or in other words to make somewhat immoderate statements (see Mamère v. France, no. 12697/03, § 25, ECHR 2006-XIII, and Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 56, ECHR 2007-IV).
• EGMR, 06.12.1988 - 10588/83

  BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  The Court reiterates that as a general rule the admissibility of evidence is a matter for regulation by national law and appreciation by the domestic courts which assess the evidence before them as well as the relevance of the evidence which the accused seeks to adduce (see Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain, 6 December 1988, § 68, Series A no. 146).
• EGMR, 25.01.2011 - 56975/09

  Christopher Donaldson ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  Such are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" (see Handyside v. the United Kingdom, 7 December 1976, § 49, Series A no. 24; Donaldson v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no.56975/09, § 27, 25 January 2011; and Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 48876/08, § 100, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 43587/09

  LOPUCH v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 27560/15

  As regards the test of "necessity in the democratic society", the relevant general principles are set out in the Court's judgment in the case ?�opuch v. Poland, no. 43587/09, §§ 54-58, 24 July 2012.
• EGMR, 22.04.2013 - 48876/08

  Verbot politischer Fernsehwerbung