Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SIDJIMOV v. BULGARIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 13 Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 04.09.2003 - 55057/00
• EGMR, 27.01.2005 - 55057/00

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

  PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2005 - 55057/00

  Having regard to the criteria established in its case-law for the assessment of the reasonableness of the length of proceedings (see, among many others, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, ECHR 1999-II; and Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC], no. 49017/99, 17 December 2004), the Court finds that the length of the criminal proceedings against the applicant failed to satisfy the reasonable time requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
• EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00

  MIFSUD contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2005 - 55057/00

  Article 13 therefore offers an alternative: a remedy will be considered "effective" if it can be used either to expedite a decision by the courts dealing with the case, or to provide the litigant with adequate redress for delays that have already occurred (see Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, ECHR 2002-VIII).
• EKMR, 06.09.1995 - 24559/94

  GIBAS c. POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2005 - 55057/00

  In particular, the possibility to complain to the various levels of the prosecution authorities cannot be regarded as an effective remedy because such hierarchical complaints aim to urge the authorities to utilise their discretion and do not give the accused a personal right to compel the State to exercise its supervisory powers (see Gibas v. Poland, no. 24559/94, Commission decision of 6 September 1995, Decisions and Reports 82, p. 76, at p. 82, Kuchar and Stis v. Czech Republic (dec.), 37527/97, 23 May 2000, Horvat v. Croatia, no. 51585/99, §§ 47 and 64, ECHR 2001-VIII and Hartman v. Czech Republic, no. 53341/99, § 66, ECHR 2003-VIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 23.09.2004 - 54178/00

  OSMANOV AND YUSEINOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2005 - 55057/00

  As the Court found in its Osmanov and Yuseinov v. Bulgaria judgment (nos. 54178/00 and 59901/00, §§ 38-42, 23 September 2004) at the relevant time there was no formal remedy under Bulgarian law that could have expedited the determination of the criminal charges against the applicant.

• EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 43007/04

  KRAEV c. BULGARIE

  Elle a établi dans un certain nombre d'affaires, y compris dans des affaires dirigées contre la Bulgarie, sa pratique concernant les griefs relatifs à la violation du droit à être entendu dans un délai raisonnable, garanti par l'article 6 § 1, et du droit à une voie de recours interne effective, consacré par l'article 13 de la Convention (voir, par exemple, Pélissier et Sassi c. France [GC], no 25444/94, § 67, CEDH 1999-II ; Sidjimov c. Bulgarie, no 55057/00, §§ 32 à 43, 27 janvier 2005 ; Karamitrov et autres c. Bulgarie, no 53321/99, §§ 54 à 61, 10 janvier 2008).