Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 28.11.2006 - 9210/02 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2006,48472) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (2)
- EGMR, 06.02.2001 - 44599/98
BENSAID c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2006 - 9210/02
The Court reiterates further that the word "remedy" within the meaning of Article 13 does not mean a remedy which is bound to succeed, but simply an accessible remedy before an authority competent to examine the merits of a complaint (see, mutatis mutandis, Bensaid v. the United Kingdom, no. 44599/98, § 56, ECHR 2001-I). - EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82
BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2006 - 9210/02
For similar reasons, the applicants did not have an "arguable claim" (see, for example, Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, p. 23, § 52) and Article 13 of the Convention is therefore inapplicable to them.
- EGMR, 31.03.2022 - 38321/17
MASLÁK v. SLOVAKIA (No. 2)
However, in so far as any such cases have been brought before the Court, and in so far as the effectiveness of that action as a remedy for the Convention purposes has been recognised, those cases differed from the present case generically, thematically and contextually (see Babjak and Others v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 73693/01, 30 March 2004; Furdík v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 42994/05, 2 December 2008; and Balá?¾ and Others v. Slovakia (dec.) no. 9210/02, 28 November 2006). - EGMR, 01.09.2020 - 20649/18
R.R. AND R.D. v. SLOVAKIA
In that connection, they relied on the Court's decisions in Furdík v. Slovakia (no. 42994/05, 2 December 2008) and Baláz and Others v. Slovakia (no. 9210/02, 28 November 2006) and the judgments in V.C. v. Slovakia (no. 18968/07, §§ 125-9, ECHR 2011 (extracts)) and N.B. v. Slovakia (no. 29518/10, §§ 84-8, 12 June 2012).