Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  HUNGUEST ZRT v. HUNGARY

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  HUNGUEST ZRT v. HUNGARY

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 66209/10
• EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75

  SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 66209/10

  In assessing the proportionality of the interference, the Court must determine whether a fair balance was struck between the demands of the general interest of the community and the protection of the individual's fundamental rights (see Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, § 68, Series A no. 52).
• EGMR, 21.07.2005 - 57001/00

  STRAIN ET AUTRES c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 66209/10

  The requisite balance will not be struck where the person concerned bears an individual and excessive burden (see Strain and Others v. Romania, no. 57001/00, § 44, ECHR 2005-VII).
• EKMR, 08.09.1997 - 30229/96

  J. M.F. ET AUTRES contre le PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 66209/10

  The Court has already held that when scrutinising an interference with an applicant's right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions, the state of uncertainty in which the applicants might find themselves as a result of delays attributable to the authorities is a factor to be taken into account in assessing the State's conduct in such litigations (see Almeida Garrett, Mascarenhas Falcão and Others v. Portugal, nos. 29813/96 and 30229/96, § 54, ECHR 2000-I; and Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no. 31443/96, §§ 151 and 185, ECHR 2004-V).

 
• EGMR, 20.09.2011 - 17854/04

  SHESTI MAI ENGINEERING OOD AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 66209/10

  At this juncture, the Court recalls that while Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 is essentially concerned with preventing unwarranted State interference with property rights, in certain situations the effective enjoyment of the rights guaranteed by that provision may entail the adoption of positive measures, even in cases involving litigation between private individuals or companies (see Shesti Mai Engineering OOD and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 17854/04, § 79, 20 September 2011).
• EGMR, 03.11.2005 - 52788/99

  GROZEVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 66209/10

  This is so because - although there is no obligation under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to apply an inflation-proofed default interest rate to private claims (see O.N. v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 35221/97, 6 April 2000; and Grozeva v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 52788/99, 3 November 2005) - national law often provides for default interest payable to a successful plaintiff, whose amount will increase with time.
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 35221/97

  O.N. v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 66209/10

  This is so because - although there is no obligation under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to apply an inflation-proofed default interest rate to private claims (see O.N. v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 35221/97, 6 April 2000; and Grozeva v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 52788/99, 3 November 2005) - national law often provides for default interest payable to a successful plaintiff, whose amount will increase with time.