Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VANNUCCI v. SAN MARINO

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 10.02.2009 - 14939/03

  Sergeï Zolotoukhine ./. Russland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 33898/15

  The Court reiterates that Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 must be understood as prohibiting the prosecution or trial of a second "offence" in so far as it arises from identical facts or facts which are substantially the same (see Sergey Zolotukhin v. Russia [GC], no. 14939/03, § 82, ECHR 2009, and A and B v. Norway [GC], nos. 24130/11 and 29758/11, § 108, ECHR 2016).
• EGMR, 15.11.2016 - 24130/11

  A ET B c. NORVÈGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 33898/15

  The Court reiterates that Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 must be understood as prohibiting the prosecution or trial of a second "offence" in so far as it arises from identical facts or facts which are substantially the same (see Sergey Zolotukhin v. Russia [GC], no. 14939/03, § 82, ECHR 2009, and A and B v. Norway [GC], nos. 24130/11 and 29758/11, § 108, ECHR 2016).
• EGMR, 09.02.1995 - 17440/90

  WELCH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 33898/15

  Other factors that may be taken into account as relevant in this connection are the nature and purpose of the measure in question, its characterisation under national law, the procedures involved in the making and implementation of the measure and its severity (see Welch v. the United Kingdom, 9 February 1995, § 28, Series A no. 307-A, and Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC], no. 21906/04, § 142, ECHR 2008).

 
• EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90

  GRADINGER c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 33898/15

  Moreover, the aim of the provision is to prohibit the repetition of criminal proceedings that have been concluded by a "final" decision (see Franz Fischer v. Austria, no. 37950/97, § 22, 29 May 2001, and Gradinger v. Austria, 23 October 1995, § 53, Series A no. 328-C).
• EGMR, 04.09.2014 - 140/10

  Belgien wegen Auslieferung von Ex-Fußballprofi verurteilt

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 33898/15

  In addition, the Court reiterates its case-law to the effect that Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 does not secure the ne bis in idem principle in respect of prosecutions and convictions in different States (see, among other authorities, Trabelsi v. Belgium, no. 140/10, § 164, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 20.10.2015 - 35343/05

  VASILIAUSKAS c. LITUANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 33898/15

  The Court has thus indicated that when speaking of "law" Article 7 alludes to the very same concept as that to which the Convention refers elsewhere when using that term, a concept which comprises written as well as unwritten law and implies qualitative requirements, notably those of accessibility and foreseeability (see, inter alia, Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania [GC], no. 35343/05, § 154, ECHR 2015).
• EGMR, 05.07.2005 - 19581/04

  VAN OFFEREN v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 33898/15

  The Court reiterates that in a number of cases it has treated confiscation proceedings following on from a conviction as part of the sentencing process and therefore as beyond the scope of Article 6 § 2 (see, mutatis mutandis, Phillips v. the United Kingdom, no. 41087/98, § 36, ECHR 2001-VII, and Van Offeren v. The Netherlands (dec.), no. 19581/04, ECHR 2005).

• BVerfG, 10.02.2021 - 2 BvL 8/19

  Rückwirkende strafrechtliche Vermögensabschöpfung verfassungsgemäß

  Weitere relevante Faktoren sind die Art und der Zweck der Maßnahme, ihre Charakterisierung nach innerstaatlichem Recht, die mit ihrer Schaffung und Durchführung verbundenen Verfahren und ihre Schwere (vgl. EGMR, Welch v. The United Kingdom, Urteil vom 9. Februar 1995, Nr. 17440/90, § 28; Vannucci v. San Marino, Entscheidung vom 28. März 2017, Nr. 33898/15, § 40; EGMR (GK), G.I.E.M. S.r.l. and Others v. Italy, Urteil vom 28. Juni 2018, Nr. 1828/06 and 2 others, § 211; EGMR, Balsamo v. San Marino, Urteil vom 8. Oktober 2019, Nr. 20319/17 and 21414/17, § 59; vgl. entsprechend zum Strafbegriff außerhalb des Bereichs der vermögensabschöpfenden Maßnahmen EGMR (GK), Ilnseher v. Germany, Urteil vom 4. Dezember 2018, Nr. 10211/12 and 27505/14, § 203).
• EGMR - 54332/19 (anhängig)

  ASCIONE AND OTHERS v. ITALY and 5 other applications

  Taking into account the characterisation of the contested measure by the national courts, can the confiscation of the proceeds of crime by equivalent means provided by Article 11 of Law no. 146/2006 be considered a penalty within the meaning of Article 7 § 1 of the Convention (see, for general principles, G.I.E.M. S.R.L. and Others v. Italy [GC], nos. 1828/06 and 2 others, § 211 ss., 28 June 2018; see also Vannucci v. San Marino (dec.), no. 33898/15, § 41, 28 March 2017; compare and contrast Voiculescu v. Romania, no. 5325/03, §§ 12-13, 3 February 2009)?.

  Taking into account the characterisation of the contested measure by the national courts, can the confiscation of the proceeds of crime by equivalent means provided by Article 11 of Law no. 146/2006 be considered a penalty within the meaning of Article 7 § 1 of the Convention (see, for general principles, G.I.E.M. S.R.L. and Others v. Italy [GC], nos. 1828/06 and 2 others, § 211 ss., 28 June 2018; see also Vannucci v. San Marino (dec.), no. 33898/15, § 41, 28 March 2017; compare and contrast Voiculescu v. Romania, no. 5325/03, §§ 12-13, 3 February 2009)?.

• EGMR - 26187/14 (anhängig)

  PETRIGNANI v. ITALY

  Taking into account the characterisation of the contested measure by the national courts, can the confiscation of the proceeds of crime by equivalent means be considered a penalty within the meaning of Article 7 § 1 of the Convention (see, for general principles, G.I.E.M. S.R.L. and Others v. Italy [GC], nos. 1828/06 and 2 others, § 211 ss., 28 June 2018; see also Vannucci v. San Marino (dec.), no. 33898/15, § 41, 28 March 2017; compare and contrast Voiculescu v. Romania, no. 5325/03, §§ 12-13, 3 February 2009)?.
• EGMR - 26338/19 (anhängig)

  TARTAMELLA v. ITALY and 2 other applications

  Taking into account the characterisation of the contested measure by the national courts (see, for example, Constitutional Court, decision no. 97 of 2 April 2009 and, recently, Court of Cassation, decision no. 15229 of 16 March 2022), can the confiscation of the proceeds of crime by equivalent means be considered a penalty within the meaning of Article 7 § 1 of the Convention (see, for general principles, G.I.E.M. S.R.L. and Others v. Italy [GC], nos. 1828/06 and 2 others, § 211 ss., 28 June 2018; see also Vannucci v. San Marino (dec.), no. 33898/15, § 41, 28 March 2017; compare and contrast Voiculescu v. Romania, no. 5325/03, §§ 12-13, 3 February 2009)?.