Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BRAGI GUÐMUNDUR KRISTJÁNSSON v. ICELAND

  Violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 - Right not to be tried or punished twice-general;Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  KRISTJÁNSSON v. ICELAND

  Art. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 1Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 4 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 15.11.2016 - 24130/11

  A ET B c. NORVÈGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.08.2021 - 12951/18

  24130/11 and 29758/11, 15 November 2016, and Jón Ásgeir Jóhannesson and Others (cited above).

  In comparable cases involving the imposition of tax surcharges, the Court has held, on the basis of the "Engel criteria" (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, § 82, Series A no. 22), that the proceedings in question were "criminal" in nature, not only for the purposes of Article 6 of the Convention but also for the purposes of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention (see, among other authorities, A and B v. Norway [GC], nos. 24130/11 and 29758/11, §§ 107, 136 and 138, 15 November 2016, and Jón Ásgeir Jóhannesson and Others, cited above, § 43).

  At the outset, we wish to express our agreement with the general principles set out in A and B v. Norway ([GC], nos. 24130/11 and 29758/11, § 130, 15 November 2016) and reiterated in paragraph 55 of the present judgment.

• EGMR, 10.02.2009 - 14939/03

  Sergeï Zolotoukhine ./. Russland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.08.2021 - 12951/18

  In that regard, the judgment referred, inter alia, to the Court's judgments in the cases of Sergey Zolotukhin v. Russia [GC], no. 14939/03, ECHR 2009, A and B v. Norway [GC], nos.

  The notion of the "same offence" - the idem element of the ne bis in idem principle in Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 - is to be understood as a second "offence" arising from identical facts or facts which are substantially the same (see Sergey Zolotukhin v. Russia [GC], no. 14939/03, §§ 78-84, ECHR 2009).

• EGMR, 16.06.2022 - 1735/13

  GOULANDRIS AND VARDINOGIANNI v. GREECE

  The weaker the connection in time, the greater the burden on the State to explain and justify any such delays as may be attributable to its conduct of the proceedings (see Bragi Guðmundur Kristjánsson v. Iceland, no. 12951/18, § 57, 31 August 2021).
• EGMR, 07.06.2022 - 4099/12

  YEGER v. TURKEY

  The Court also dismisses the applicant's claims in respect of pecuniary damage in so far as they concern item (ii) owing to his failure to submit any document showing that he had paid the payment order and item, (iii) as no causal link could be established between the health problems the applicant had encountered long after his release and the violations found in the present case (see Marinova and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 33502/07 and 3 others, § 119, 12 July 2016, and compare Bragi Guðmundur Kristjánsson v. Iceland, no. 12951/18, § 81, 31 August 2021).