Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 29.05.2006 - 26194/03   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2006,71166
EGMR, 29.05.2006 - 26194/03 (https://dejure.org/2006,71166)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 29.05.2006 - 26194/03 (https://dejure.org/2006,71166)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 29. Mai 2006 - 26194/03 (https://dejure.org/2006,71166)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2006,71166) 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 ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

  • EGMR, 15.07.1982 - 8130/78

    Eckle ./. Deutschland

    Auszug aus EGMR, 29.05.2006 - 26194/03
    The Court reiterates that under Article 34 of the Convention it may "receive applications from any person... claiming to be the victim of a violation by one of the High Contracting parties of the rights set forth in the Convention or the Protocols thereto..." and that in principle a decision or measure favourable to an applicant is not sufficient to deprive him of his status as a "victim" unless, the national authorities have acknowledged, either expressly or in substance, the failure to observe the reasonable time requirement and then provided redress therefor (see, for example, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, ECHR 2006-...; Riccardi Pizzati v. Italy [GC], no. 62361/01; Musci v. Italy [GC], no. 64699/01; Giuseppe Mostacciuolo v. Italy (No. 1) [GC], no. 64705/01; Giuseppe Mostacciuolo v. Italy (No. 2) [GC], no. 65102/01; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01; Apicella v. Italy [GC], no. 64890/01; Ernestina Zullo v. Italy [GC], no. 64897/01; and Giuseppina and Orestina Procaccini v. Italy [GC], no. 65075/01, all of 29 March 2006; Eckle v. Germany judgment of 15 July 1982, Series A no. 51, § 66; Jensen v. Denmark (dec.), no. 48470/99, 20 September 2001, ECHR 2001-X and Normann v. Denmark (dec.), no. 44704/98, 14 June 2001, unpublished).
  • EGMR, 13.11.2008 - 10597/03

    Rechtssache O. gegen DEUTSCHLAND

    Somit kann etwa mit der Befreiung des Betroffenen von den Gerichtskosten wie den Anwaltsgebühren, die er andernfalls hätte entrichten müssen, wegen der überlangen Verfahrensdauer im Hinblick auf die gerechte Entschädigung nach Artikel 41 der Konvention angemessene und ausreichende Wiedergutmachung geleistet werden (siehe Rechtssachen Normann, a. a. O.; Ohlen ./. Dänemark (Streichung), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 63214/00, Rdnrn. 29-31, 24. Februar 2005; und Hansen und andere ./. Dänemark (Entsch.), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 26194/03, 29. Mai 2006).
  • EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 21846/04

    BROSTED v. DENMARK

    Accordingly to domestic case-law, however, in civil proceedings initiated by an individual against or involving a public authority, the courts may grant redress for a length-of-proceedings violation, by for example exempting the individual from paying legal costs or by deciding that expenses and fees shall be covered by the Treasury (see, among others, Kirsten Norman v. Denmark (dec.), no. 44704/98, 14 June 2001 and Hansen and others v. Denmark (dec.) no. 26194/03, 29 May 2006).

    The Court reiterates that under Article 34 of the Convention it may "receive applications from any person... claiming to be the victim of a violation by one of the High Contracting parties of the rights set forth in the Convention or the Protocols thereto..." and that in principle a decision or measure favourable to an applicant is not sufficient to deprive him of his status as a "victim" unless, the national authorities have acknowledged, either expressly or in substance, the failure to observe the reasonable time requirement and then provided redress therefor (see, for example, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 180, ECHR 2006-...; Eckle v. Germany judgment of 15 July 1982, Series A no. 51, § 66; Jensen v. Denmark (dec.), no. 48470/99, 20 September 2001, ECHR 2001-X, Normann v. Denmark (dec.), no. 44704/98, 14 June 2001, and Hansen and others v. Denmark (dec.), no. 26194/03, 29 May 2006).

  • EGMR, 03.09.2015 - 34459/10

    BEKERMAN v. LIECHTENSTEIN

    Such redress may, in particular, be granted by a reduction of, or exemption from, costs and expenses which an applicant would have had to pay otherwise in the legal proceedings at issue (see, for instance, Normann v. Denmark (dec.), no. 44704/98, 14 June 2001; Hansen and Others v. Denmark (dec.), no. 26194/03, 29 May 2006; and Brøsted v. Denmark (dec.), no. 21846/04, 30 August 2006).
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