Rechtsprechung
| EKMR, 01.12.1997 - 30307/97 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1997,31885) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
B.H. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 13 MRK
Admissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 04.12.1979 - 7710/76
Schiesser ./. Schweiz
Auszug aus EKMR, 01.12.1997 - 30307/97
As to the applicant's reliance in his application on the Ireland v. the United Kingdom and the Schiesser cases (Eur. Court HR, Ireland v. the United Kingdom judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A no. 25 and Schiesser v. Switzerland judgment of 4 December 1979, Series A no. 34), the Government submit, in particular, that those cases concerned defendants who did not have access to a court with a power to order release in any circumstances or with the power to ensure a speedy trial. - EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82
BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 01.12.1997 - 30307/97
The Government submit that Article 13 (Art. 13) is not applicable since the application does not involve any arguable complaints of breaches of the Convention (Eur. Court HR, Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131). - EGMR, 08.07.1986 - 9006/80
LITHGOW AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 01.12.1997 - 30307/97
It is also argued that, in any event, Article 13 (Art. 13) does not go so far as to guarantee a remedy allowing a State's laws as such to be challenged before a national authority on the grounds of being contrary to the Convention, the Government citing the James and Others together with the Lithgow and Others judgments (Eur. Court HR, James and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 21 February 1986, Series A no. 98 and Lithgow and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 102).