Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  OVLISEN v. DENMARK

  Art. 6, Art. 13 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 28.01.2003 - 34763/02

  BURG et AUTRES contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 16469/05

  The Court finds that the Leave-to-Appeal Board's decision contained sufficient reasons for the purposes of Article 6 § 1 (see, inter alia, Bufferne v. France (dec.), no. 54367/00, ECHR 2002-III (extracts) and Burg and Others v. France (dec.), no. 34763/02, ECHR 2003-II).
• EGMR, 21.09.2004 - 42049/98

  ZWIAZEK NAUCZYCIELSTWA POLSKIEGO v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 16469/05

  Having regard to its above conclusion as to the complaint under Article 6 § 1, the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine the case under Article 13 since its requirements are less strict than, and are here absorbed by, those of Article 6 § 1 (see, for example, Zwiazek Nauczycielstwa Polskiego v. Poland, no. 42049/98, § 43, ECHR 2004-IX).
• EGMR, 23.06.1981 - 6878/75

  LE COMPTE, VAN LEUVEN ET DE MEYERE c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 16469/05

  The Court also recalls that notwithstanding the specific character of professions which are exercised in the general interest and which entails special duties incumbent on its members, the Court has found Article 6 § 1 applicable when a private right was at issue (see, inter alia, Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium, judgment of 23 June 1981, Series A no. 43).

 
• EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13071/87

  EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 16469/05

  Moreover, in so far as the applicant's complaint related to the outcome of these proceedings, the Court recalls that it is not its function to substitute its own assessment of the facts and evidence for that of the national courts or to act as a fourth instance appeal (see, among many other examples, Edwards v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 247-B, § 34).
• EGMR, 23.10.1985 - 8848/80

  BENTHEM v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 16469/05

  The Court recalls that the principles relating to the notion "dispute" (see, for example, Benthem v. the Netherlands, (judgment of 23 October 1985, Series A no. 97, § 32) include the following:.
• EGMR, 23.06.1994 - 16997/90

  DE MOOR c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 16469/05

  More specifically as regards the profession of lawyers, so far the Court has found Article 6 § 1 applicable in cases concerning respectively the readmission to the Bar of an advocate who had been struck off the Roll, and a refusal to enrol a person on the list of pupil advocates (see H. v. Belgium, (judgment of 30 November 1987, Series A no. 127-B, §§ 46-47 and De Moor v. Belgium, judgment of 23 June 1994, Series A no. 292-A).
• EGMR, 30.11.1987 - 8950/80

  H. v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 16469/05

  More specifically as regards the profession of lawyers, so far the Court has found Article 6 § 1 applicable in cases concerning respectively the readmission to the Bar of an advocate who had been struck off the Roll, and a refusal to enrol a person on the list of pupil advocates (see H. v. Belgium, (judgment of 30 November 1987, Series A no. 127-B, §§ 46-47 and De Moor v. Belgium, judgment of 23 June 1994, Series A no. 292-A).
• EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 44759/98

  Verletzung des Rechts auf ein faires Verfahren durch überlange Verfahrensdauer; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2006 - 16469/05

  Apart from fines imposed by way of "criminal sanction", this will be the case, in particular, where an obligation which is pecuniary in nature derives from tax legislation or is otherwise part of normal civic duties in a democratic society..." (see, for example, Ferrazzini v. Italy [GC], no. 44759/98, § 25, ECHR 2001-VII).