Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 38360/09   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2011,53733
EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 38360/09 (https://dejure.org/2011,53733)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 27.09.2011 - 38360/09 (https://dejure.org/2011,53733)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 27. September 2011 - 38360/09 (https://dejure.org/2011,53733)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,53733) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (13)

  • EGMR, 16.03.2000 - 51760/99

    CAMILLERI v. MALTA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 38360/09
    It also reiterates that it is not its task to review the assessment of evidence by a national court, unless it is arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable (see Camilleri v. Malta (dec.), no. 51760/99, 16 March 2000).
  • EGMR, 22.03.2001 - 34044/96

    Schießbefehl

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 38360/09
    The Court reiterates that it is not a court of fourth instance and it is not its function to deal with errors of fact or law allegedly committed by a national court unless and in so far as they may have infringed rights and freedoms protected by the Convention (see García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I, and Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany [GC], nos. 34044/96, 35532/97 and 44801/98, § 49, ECHR 2001-II).
  • EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 52690/99

    MAJEWSKI v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 38360/09
    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; and 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 - 38360/09
    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; and 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 - 38360/09
    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 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 - 38360/09
    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 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 - 38360/09
    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 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, 16.07.2009 - 21086/04

    DANESHPAYEH c. TURQUIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 38360/09
    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; and Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; and Daneshpayeh v. Turkey, no. 21086/04, §§ 28-29, 16 July 2009).
  • EGMR, 25.05.2010 - 56936/08

    SILVA MARRAFA c. PORTUGAL

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 38360/09
    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 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 - 38360/09
    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 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

  • EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

    FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  • EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 30544/96

    GARCÍA RUIZ v. SPAIN

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht