Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KOULIAS v. CYPRUS

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Impartial tribunal) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  KOULIAS v. CYPRUS

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 17.06.2003 - 62435/00

  PESCADOR VALERO v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.05.2020 - 48781/12

  The present case could be distinguished from that of (i) Pescador Valero v. Spain, (no. 62435/00, § 27, ECHR 2003-VII), in which the judge himself had been working as an associate professor at the university (one of the parties to the proceedings) and (ii) Tocono and Profesorii Prometeisti v. Moldova, (no. 32263/03, § 31, 26 June 2007), where the judge in question had threatened the school authorities - including the head teacher and teachers who had expelled his son - with retaliation.
• EGMR, 28.04.2004 - 56679/00

  AZINAS c. CHYPRE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.05.2020 - 48781/12

  Mindful of those considerations, the Court finds that the Government's objection that the relevant "effective" domestic remedy was not used by the applicant in the instant case is well-founded (see, among other authorities, Azinas v. Cyprus [GC], no. 56679/00, § 41, ECHR 2004-III, with further references).
• EGMR, 26.06.2007 - 32263/03

  TOCONO AND PROFESORII PROMETEISTI v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.05.2020 - 48781/12

  The present case could be distinguished from that of (i) Pescador Valero v. Spain, (no. 62435/00, § 27, ECHR 2003-VII), in which the judge himself had been working as an associate professor at the university (one of the parties to the proceedings) and (ii) Tocono and Profesorii Prometeisti v. Moldova, (no. 32263/03, § 31, 26 June 2007), where the judge in question had threatened the school authorities - including the head teacher and teachers who had expelled his son - with retaliation.

• EGMR, 03.10.2023 - 56578/11

  A.A.K. c. TÜRKIYE

  Or, que les quatre magistrats de Yenipazar se connaissent en qualité de confrères ne saurait assurément suffire en soi à considérer comme objectivement justifiés des doutes quant à leur impartialité (voir, par exemple, Steck-Risch et autres c. Liechtenstein, no 63151/00, § 48, 19 mai 2005), étant entendu que les griefs tirés de la partialité ne devraient pas être susceptibles de paralyser le système juridique d'un État défendeur et que dans de petites juridictions locales, telles que celle de Yenipazar, l'administration de la justice pourrait être indûment entravée par l'application de normes trop strictes à cet égard (voir, mutatis mutandis, A.K. c. Liechtenstein, no 38191/12, § 82, 9 juillet 2015, Nicholas c. Chypre, no 63246/10, § 63, 9 janvier 2018, et Koulias c. Chypre, no 48781/12, § 62, 26 mai 2020).