Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10, 50673/10, 50714/10, 13078/11, 15596/11, 8024/12, 1404/13, 3603/13, 7444/13, 7452/13   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2021,53
EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10, 50673/10, 50714/10, 13078/11, 15596/11, 8024/12, 1404/13, 3603/13, 7444/13, 7452/13 (https://dejure.org/2021,53)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 12.01.2021 - 50104/10, 50673/10, 50714/10, 13078/11, 15596/11, 8024/12, 1404/13, 3603/13, 7444/13, 7452/13 (https://dejure.org/2021,53)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 12. Januar 2021 - 50104/10, 50673/10, 50714/10, 13078/11, 15596/11, 8024/12, 1404/13, 3603/13, 7444/13, 7452/13 (https://dejure.org/2021,53)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2021,53) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    SVILENGACANIN AND OTHERS v. SERBIA

    Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Impartial tribunal) (englisch)

Sonstiges

 
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 ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

  • EGMR, 21.12.2000 - 33958/96

    WETTSTEIN v. SWITZERLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10
    What is decisive is whether this fear can be held to be objectively justified (see Wettstein v. Switzerland, no. 33958/96, § 44, ECHR 2000-XII, and Ferrantelli and Santangelo v. Italy, 7 August 1996, § 58, Reports 1996-III).
  • EGMR, 02.12.2008 - 42162/02

    SCHWARZKOPF ET TAUSSIK c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10
    24428/03 and 26977/03, §§ 33-36, 27 January 2009; Schwarzkopf and Taussik v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 42162/02, 2 December 2008; Tudor Tudor, cited above, § 31; Stefanica and Others v. Romania, no. 38155/02, § 36, 2 November 2010);.
  • EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 39343/98

    KLEYN AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

    Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10
    The Court does not observe in the present case such issues as unclear separation of powers or internal structural impartiality (compare and contrast Procola v. Luxembourg, 28 September 1995, § 45, Series A no. 326, and Kleyn and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], nos. 39343/98 and 3 others, §§ 193-96, ECHR 2003-VI, in which judicial functions and the structural function of advising the government were combined within the Conseil d"Etat and where the structure of the body in issue was such that its members could successively exercise both functions).
  • EGMR, 26.10.1984 - 9186/80

    DE CUBBER v. BELGIUM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10
    As regards the type of proof required, the Court has, for example, sought to ascertain whether a judge has displayed hostility or ill will for personal reasons (see De Cubber v. Belgium, 26 October 1984, § 25, Series A no. 86).
  • EGMR, 01.10.1982 - 8692/79

    PIERSACK v. BELGIUM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10
    Moreover, in order that the courts may inspire in the public the confidence which is indispensable, account must also be taken of questions of internal organisation (see Piersack v. Belgium, 1 October 1982, § 30(d), Series A no. 53).
  • EGMR, 28.09.1995 - 14570/89

    PROCOLA c. LUXEMBOURG

    Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10
    The Court does not observe in the present case such issues as unclear separation of powers or internal structural impartiality (compare and contrast Procola v. Luxembourg, 28 September 1995, § 45, Series A no. 326, and Kleyn and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], nos. 39343/98 and 3 others, §§ 193-96, ECHR 2003-VI, in which judicial functions and the structural function of advising the government were combined within the Conseil d"Etat and where the structure of the body in issue was such that its members could successively exercise both functions).
  • EGMR, 02.11.2010 - 38155/02

    STEFANICA AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 50104/10
    24428/03 and 26977/03, §§ 33-36, 27 January 2009; Schwarzkopf and Taussik v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 42162/02, 2 December 2008; Tudor Tudor, cited above, § 31; Stefanica and Others v. Romania, no. 38155/02, § 36, 2 November 2010);.
  • EGMR, 16.01.2024 - 49066/12

    NAFORNITA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

    50104/10 and 9 others, § 79, 12 January 2021).
  • EGMR, 14.12.2021 - 3409/16

    MAGISTE INTERNATIONAL S.A. c. ITALIE

    Quant à la question de savoir si ce contraste de jurisprudence a porté atteinte aux droits de la requérante, la Cour renvoie aux principes applicables en la matière (Svilengacanin et autres c. Serbie, nos 50104/10 et 9 autres, § 79, 12 janvier 2021, avec la jurisprudence citée).
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