Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 27.04.2000 - 27752/95 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2000,32369) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
KUOPILA v. FINLAND
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 01.06.1999 - 27752/95
- EGMR, 27.04.2000 - 27752/95
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (1)
- EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 12005/86
BORGERS v. BELGIUM
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2000 - 27752/95
The Court recalls that under the principle of equality of arms, as a feature of the wider concept of a fair trial (see, among other authorities, the Borgers v. Belgium judgment of 30 October 1999, Series A no. 214-B, § 24), each party must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present one's case in conditions that do not place him at a disadvantage vis-à-vis to his opponent (see the Bulut v. Austria judgment of 22 February 1996, Reports 1996-II, § 47).
- EGMR, 06.10.2020 - 65107/16
GRACIA GONZALEZ v. SPAIN
The extent to which those submissions influenced the court's assessment is not decisive from the point of view of the applicant's right to a fair hearing (see Kuopila v. Finland, no. 27752/95, § 35, 27 April 2000; see also Milatová and Others v. the Czech Republic, no. 61811/00, § 65, ECHR 2005-V, and Nideröst-Huber, § 27, cited above). - EGMR, 19.09.2019 - 79441/17
ANDERSENA v. LATVIA
The extent to which those submissions influenced the court's assessment is not decisive from the point of view of the applicant's right to a fair hearing (see Kuopila v. Finland, no. 27752/95, § 35, 27 April 2000; see also Milatová and Others, § 65, and Nideröst-Huber, § 27, both cited above).