Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 31.10.2017 - 49418/09 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,44367) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GEORGIEV v. BULGARIA
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 9808/02
STOICHKOV v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.10.2017 - 49418/09
In two judgments given in 2001 and 2007 (Ñ?µÑ?. â?? 233 oÑ? 19.06.2001 ³. ¿o ½. ´. â?? 173/2001 ³., ??., I ½. o., and Ñ?µÑ?. â?? 76 oÑ? 12.04.2007 ³. ¿o ½. ´. â?? 759/2006 ³., ??., II ½. o., cited respectively in Stoichkov v. Bulgaria, no. 9808/02, § 33, 24 March 2005, and in Stoyanov-Kobuladze, cited above, § 22), the Supreme Court of Cassation held that the destruction of the case file of the original proceedings precluded reopening under Article 362a § 1.Imprisonment pursuant to a "conviction" handed down in proceedings conducted in absentia whose reopening it is impossible to obtain cannot be justified under Article 5 § 1 (a) of the Convention (see Stoichkov v. Bulgaria, no. 9808/02, §§ 51-59, 24 March 2005; Willcox and Hurford v. the United Kingdom (dec.), nos.
- EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 43759/10
WILLCOX AND HURFORD v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.10.2017 - 49418/09
43759/10 and 43771/12, § 95, ECHR 2013; and Baratta v. Italy, no. 28263/09, § 114, 13 October 2015). - EGMR, 19.03.1991 - 11069/84
CARDOT c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.10.2017 - 49418/09
To exhaust domestic remedies, as required under that provision, when bringing domestic proceedings applicants must comply with the formal requirements and time-limits laid down in domestic law (see, in general, Cardot v. France, 19 March 1991, § 34, Series A no. 200; Sejdovic v. Italy [GC], no. 56581/00, § 44, ECHR 2006-II; and Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, § 142 in fine, ECHR 2010, and, specifically as regards time-limits, Ben Salah Adraqui and Dhaime v. Spain (dec.), no. 45023/98, ECHR 2000-IV; UTE Saur Vallnet v. Andorra, no. 16047/10, §§ 62-64, 29 May 2012; and Perus v. Slovenia, no. 35016/05, § 47, 27 September 2012). - EGMR, 27.04.2000 - 45023/98
BEN SALAH ADRAQUI and DHAIME v. SPAIN
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.10.2017 - 49418/09
To exhaust domestic remedies, as required under that provision, when bringing domestic proceedings applicants must comply with the formal requirements and time-limits laid down in domestic law (see, in general, Cardot v. France, 19 March 1991, § 34, Series A no. 200; Sejdovic v. Italy [GC], no. 56581/00, § 44, ECHR 2006-II; and Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, § 142 in fine, ECHR 2010, and, specifically as regards time-limits, Ben Salah Adraqui and Dhaime v. Spain (dec.), no. 45023/98, ECHR 2000-IV; UTE Saur Vallnet v. Andorra, no. 16047/10, §§ 62-64, 29 May 2012; and Perus v. Slovenia, no. 35016/05, § 47, 27 September 2012).