Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MILD AND VIRTANEN v. FINLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 41, Art. 6 Abs. 1+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-d Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 13.01.2004 - 39481/98
• EGMR, 26.07.2005 - 39481/98, 40227/98

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 26.04.1991 - 12398/86

  ASCH v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2005 - 39481/98

  He referred to two judgments of this Court (Asch v. Austria, judgment of 26 April 1991, Series A no. 203 and Artner v. Austria, judgment of 28 August 1992, Series A no. 242-A).
• EGMR, 28.08.1992 - 13161/87

  ARTNER v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2005 - 39481/98

  He referred to two judgments of this Court (Asch v. Austria, judgment of 26 April 1991, Series A no. 203 and Artner v. Austria, judgment of 28 August 1992, Series A no. 242-A).
• EGMR, 15.06.1992 - 12433/86

  LÜDI v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2005 - 39481/98

  As a general rule, paragraphs 1 and 3(d) of Article 6 require that the defendant be given an adequate and proper opportunity to challenge and question a witness against him, either when he makes his statements or at a later stage (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, judgment of 15 June 1992, Series A no. 238, p. 21, § 49).

• EGMR, 22.11.2012 - 46203/08

  TSEBER c. RÉPUBLIQUE TCHÈQUE

  Pour apprécier le caractère suffisant ou non des mesures positives adoptées par les autorités internes, la Cour recherche si elles ont fait tout ce que l'on pouvait raisonnablement attendre d'elles pour localiser le témoin concerné et si elles n'ont pas manqué de diligence dans leurs tentatives d'assurer sa présence à la barre (voir, mutatis mutandis, Mild et Virtanen c. Finlande, nos 39481/98 et 40227/98, §§ 45-47, 26 juillet 2005 ; Haas c. Allemagne (déc.), no 73047/01, 17 novembre 2005 ; Pello c. Estonie, no 11423/03, §§ 34-35, 12 avril 2007).
• EGMR, 08.06.2006 - 60018/00

  Konfrontationsrecht (Verwertungsverbot hinsichtlich einer entscheidenden …

  As a rule, these rights entail an adequate and proper opportunity for the accused to challenge and question the witnesses against him, either when they make their statements or at a later stage of the proceedings (see Delta v. France, judgment of 19 December 1990, Series A no. 191"A, p. 16, § 36; and, more recently, Mild and Virtanen v. Finland, no. 39481/98 and 40227/98, § 42, 26 July 2005).
• EGMR, 18.12.2014 - 27304/07

  EFENDIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Even where the evidence of an absent witness has not been sole or decisive, the Court has still found a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) when no good reason has been shown for the failure to have the witness examined (see, for example, in Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, Series A no. 238; Mild and Virtanen v. Finland, no. 39481/98 and 40227/98, 26 July 2005; Bonev v. Bulgaria, no. 60018/00, 8 June 2006; and Pello v. Estonia, no. 11423/03, 12 April 2007).
• EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 37981/06

  SARKIZOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  It is true that even where the evidence of an absent witness has not been sole or decisive, the Court has still found a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) when no good reason has been shown for the failure to have the witnesses examined (see, for example, in Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, Series A no. 238, Mild and Virtanen v. Finland, no. 39481/98 and 40227/98, 26 July 2005, Bonev v. Bulgaria, no. 60018/00, 8 June 2006; and Pello v. Estonia, no. 11423/03, 12 April 2007).
• EGMR, 08.04.2021 - 59052/19

  GUIDI AND OTHERS v. SAN MARINO

  Alleged accomplices in an offence (convicted in prior proceedings) are also to be regarded as witnesses, for the purposes of Article 6 § 3 (d), when their statements are brought before the court who takes account of them in deciding the case against the applicants (see Mild and Virtanen v. Finland, nos. 39481/98 and 40227/98, § 43, 26 July 2005).