|EGMR, 26.09.2006 - 50224/99|
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SIDLOVA v. SLOVAKIA
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 13 Not necessary to examine under P1-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - domestic and Convention proceedings (englisch)
- EGMR, 22.02.2005 - 50224/99
- EGMR, 26.09.2006 - 50224/99
- EGMR, 10.05.2007 - 56026/00
WENDE AND KUKOWKA v. POLANDTherefore, applying the above criteria, and having regard to the vague and ill-defined nature of the requirement (c.f. Sidlová v. Slovakia, no. 50224/99, § 53, 26 September 2006) the Court is satisfied that the applicant did everything that could reasonably be expected of her to exhaust domestic remedies.
- EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 23788/06
BECOVA v. SLOVAKIAIt must be established whether the applicant used the remedy in a manner which allowed the competent domestic authority to redress the alleged violation of his or her right to a hearing within a reasonable time (see, for example, Sidlová v. Slovakia, no. 50224/99, § 53, 26 September 2006, with further references).
- EGMR, 08.11.2011 - 46092/06
KORMOS v. SLOVAKIAThus the applicant had a remedy at his disposal at the national level to enforce the substance of the right under Article 5 § 1. The fact that the redress obtained at the domestic level was not sufficient for the Convention purposes does not render the remedy under Article 127 of the Constitution in the circumstances of the present case incompatible with Article 13 of the Convention (see also, mutatis mutandis, Sidlová v. Slovakia, no. 50224/99, § 77, 26 September 2006, and Mosat v. Slovakia, no. 27452/05, § 27, 21 September 2010).
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.