Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GÖÇMEN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1 MRK
Partly struck out of the list Partly inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (10)
- EGMR, 16.07.2009 - 21086/04
DANESHPAYEH c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
Le Gouvernement considère que la procédure interne engagée par les requérants a connu une durée excessive au sens de la jurisprudence bien établie de la Cour (Daneshpayeh c. Turquie, no 21086/04, 16 juillet 2009).The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Turkey, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (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-V; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; and Daneshpayeh v. Turkey, no. 21086/04, §§ 28-29, 16 July 2009).
- EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 52690/99
MAJEWSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Turkey, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (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-V; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; and Daneshpayeh v. Turkey, no. 21086/04, §§ 28-29, 16 July 2009). - EGMR, 10.05.2007 - 56026/00
WENDE AND KUKOWKA v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Turkey, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (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-V; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; and Daneshpayeh v. Turkey, no. 21086/04, §§ 28-29, 16 July 2009).
- EGMR, 26.06.2007 - 11602/02
SPÓLKA Z O.O. WAZA v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
To this end, the Court will examine carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; also WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03; Stark and Others v. Finland (striking out), no. 39559/02, § 23, 9 October 2007; Silva Marrafa v. Portugal (dec.), no. 56936/08, 25 May 2010; Karal v. Turkey (dec.), no. 44655/09, 29 March 2011; and Barıs Ä°nan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 20315/10, 24 May 2011). - EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 28953/03
SULWINSKA v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
To this end, the Court will examine carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; also WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03; Stark and Others v. Finland (striking out), no. 39559/02, § 23, 9 October 2007; Silva Marrafa v. Portugal (dec.), no. 56936/08, 25 May 2010; Karal v. Turkey (dec.), no. 44655/09, 29 March 2011; and Barıs Ä°nan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 20315/10, 24 May 2011). - EGMR, 09.10.2007 - 39559/02
STARK AND OTHERS v. FINLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
To this end, the Court will examine carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; also WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03; Stark and Others v. Finland (striking out), no. 39559/02, § 23, 9 October 2007; Silva Marrafa v. Portugal (dec.), no. 56936/08, 25 May 2010; Karal v. Turkey (dec.), no. 44655/09, 29 March 2011; and Barıs Ä°nan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 20315/10, 24 May 2011). - EGMR, 25.05.2010 - 56936/08
SILVA MARRAFA c. PORTUGAL
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
To this end, the Court will examine carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; also WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03; Stark and Others v. Finland (striking out), no. 39559/02, § 23, 9 October 2007; Silva Marrafa v. Portugal (dec.), no. 56936/08, 25 May 2010; Karal v. Turkey (dec.), no. 44655/09, 29 March 2011; and Barıs Ä°nan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 20315/10, 24 May 2011). - EGMR, 29.03.2011 - 44655/09
KARAL c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
To this end, the Court will examine carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; also WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03; Stark and Others v. Finland (striking out), no. 39559/02, § 23, 9 October 2007; Silva Marrafa v. Portugal (dec.), no. 56936/08, 25 May 2010; Karal v. Turkey (dec.), no. 44655/09, 29 March 2011; and Barıs Ä°nan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 20315/10, 24 May 2011). - EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 20315/10
BARIS INAN c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
To this end, the Court will examine carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; also WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03; Stark and Others v. Finland (striking out), no. 39559/02, § 23, 9 October 2007; Silva Marrafa v. Portugal (dec.), no. 56936/08, 25 May 2010; Karal v. Turkey (dec.), no. 44655/09, 29 March 2011; and Barıs Ä°nan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 20315/10, 24 May 2011). - EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96
FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 17293/07
The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Turkey, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (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-V; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; and Daneshpayeh v. Turkey, no. 21086/04, §§ 28-29, 16 July 2009).