Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TABOR v. POLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 28.05.2002 - 12825/02
• EGMR, 24.01.2006 - 12825/02
• EGMR, 27.06.2006 - 12825/02
• EGMR, 02.12.2011 - 12825/02

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 09.10.1979 - 6289/73

  AIREY v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.06.2006 - 12825/02

  In this context, the means by which a State ensured effective access to civil courts fell within its margin of appreciation (Airey v. Ireland, judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32, § 26).

  This is particularly so of the right of access to court in view of the prominent place held in a democratic society by the right to a fair trial (see Airey v. Ireland, judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32, § 24).

• EGMR, 26.02.2002 - 46800/99

  DEL SOL c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.06.2006 - 12825/02

  The Court points out at the outset that there is no obligation under the Convention to make legal aid available for disputes (contestations) in civil proceedings, as there is a clear distinction between the wording of Article 6 § 3 (c), which guarantees the right to free legal assistance on certain conditions in criminal proceedings, and of Article 6 § 1, which makes no reference to legal assistance (Del Sol v. France, no. 46800/99, § 20, ECHR 2002-II).
• EGMR, 17.01.1970 - 2689/65

  DELCOURT c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.06.2006 - 12825/02

  In addition, the compatibility of the limitations permitted under domestic law with the right of access to a court set forth in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention depends on the special features of the proceedings in issue, and it is necessary to take into account the whole of the trial conducted according to the rules of the domestic legal system and the role played in that trial by the highest court, since the conditions of admissibility of an appeal on points of law may be more rigorous than those for an ordinary appeal (Delcourt v. Belgium, judgment of 17 January 1970, Series A no. 11, p. 15, § 26).
• EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01

  STEEL ET MORRIS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.06.2006 - 12825/02

  It is central to the concept of a fair trial, in civil as in criminal proceedings, that a litigant is not denied the opportunity to present his or her case effectively before the court (ibid.; see also among other examples Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 59, ECHR 2005-...).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 14.09.2023 - C-582/21

  Profi Credit Polska (Réouverture de la procédure terminée par une décision …

  50 Entscheidung des polnischen Obersten Gerichts I PZ 5/07 vom 17. April 2007 sowie, nach meinem Verständnis und unter dem Vorbehalt der Prüfung durch das vorlegende Gericht, EGMR, 27. Juni 2006, Tabor/Polen (ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0627JUD001282502).
• EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 77765/01

  LASKOWSKA v. POLAND

  The Court recalls that there is a clear distinction between the wording of Article 6 § 3 (c), which guarantees the right to free legal assistance on certain conditions in criminal proceedings, and of Article 6 § 1, which makes no reference to legal assistance (Del Sol v. France, no. 46800/99, § 20, ECHR 2002-II; Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, § 39, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 28095/08

  SIWIEC v. POLAND

  In this connection, the Court reiterates that there is no obligation under the Convention to make legal aid available for disputes (contestations) in civil proceedings, as there is a clear distinction between the wording of Article 6 § 3 (c), which guarantees the right to free legal assistance under certain conditions in criminal proceedings, and of Article 6 § 1, which makes no reference to legal assistance (see Del Sol v. France, no. 46800/99, § 20, ECHR 2002-II, and Tabor v. Poland, no 12825/02, § 39, 27 June 2006).

 
• EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 30358/04

  WERSEL v. POLAND

  However, the Court must satisfy itself that the method chosen by the domestic authorities in a particular case is compatible with the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, in criminal law proceedings, R.D. v. Poland, nos. 29692/96 and 34612/97, § 44, 18 December 2001; Kulikowski v. Poland, no. 18353/03, §§ 58 and 59 ECHR 2009-... (extracts); Antonicelli v. Poland, no. 2815/05, §§ 33 and 34, 19 May 2009 and, in civil law proceedings, Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, §§ 39-43, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 17325/04

  POTOCKI v. POLAND

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the granting of legal aid and the lodging of cassation appeals are stated in the Court's judgment in Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, §§ 16-23, 27 June 2006.
• EGMR, 26.05.2009 - 17157/04

  WROBEL v. POLAND

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the granting of legal aid and the lodging of cassation appeals are stated in the Court's judgment in Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, §§ 16-23, 27 June 2006.
• EGMR, 26.05.2009 - 40048/07

  WINKLER v. POLAND

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning granting legal aid and lodging of cassation appeals are stated in the Court's judgment of Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, §§ 16-23, 27 June 2006.
• EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  NOWINSKI v. POLAND

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time and about the lack of an effective remedy capable of providing redress for a breach of this right (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-....; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-IX, Charzynski v. Poland (dec.) no. 15212/03, HR 2005-..., and Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, 27 June 2006).