Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 26.09.2023 - 16087/18 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2023,25238) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
JELCIC STEPINAC v. CROATIA
Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
JELCIC STEPINAC v. CROATIA
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08
CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.09.2023 - 16087/18
Having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties, and its findings above, the Court considers that it has dealt with the main legal questions raised by the case and that there is no need to examine this remaining complaint (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014). - EGMR, 19.09.2013 - 23160/09
STOJANOVIC v. CROATIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.09.2023 - 16087/18
That claim must be rejected given that the applicant will be able to have those costs and expenses reimbursed should the third set of civil proceedings be reopened (see, for example, Stojanovic v. Croatia, no. 23160/09, § 84, 19 September 2013). - EGMR, 12.07.2022 - 35802/16
KRIVTSOVA c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.09.2023 - 16087/18
These principles apply not only in cases where a final judgment is quashed but also where it is deprived of legal effect on account of a decision given in separate proceedings (see, for example, Gra?¾uleviciute, cited above, § 79; Samat v. Turkey, no. 29115/07, §§ 59 et seq., 21 January 2020; and Krivtsova v. Russia, no. 35802/16, § 38, 12 July 2022). - EGMR, 14.12.2021 - 53176/17
GRAZULEVICIUTE v. LITHUANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.09.2023 - 16087/18
The principle of legal certainty dictates that where a civil dispute is examined on the merits by the courts, it should be decided once and for all, and a departure from that principle is justified only when made necessary by circumstances of a substantial and compelling character, such as the correction of fundamental defects or a miscarriage of justice (see, for example, Gra?¾uleviciute v. Lithuania, no. 53176/17, §§ 73, 80 and 82, 14 December 2021). - EGMR, 21.01.2020 - 29115/07
SAMAT v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.09.2023 - 16087/18
These principles apply not only in cases where a final judgment is quashed but also where it is deprived of legal effect on account of a decision given in separate proceedings (see, for example, Gra?¾uleviciute, cited above, § 79; Samat v. Turkey, no. 29115/07, §§ 59 et seq., 21 January 2020; and Krivtsova v. Russia, no. 35802/16, § 38, 12 July 2022).