Rechtsprechung
| EKMR, 02.07.1997 - 31004/96 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1997,32963) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
J.N. v. HUNGARY
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 10.12.1982 - 7604/76
FOTI ET AUTRES c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EKMR, 02.07.1997 - 31004/96
The Commission recalls that the period to be considered begins only on 5 November 1992, when Hungary's recognition of the right of individual petition took effect (cf., Eur. Court HR, Foti and others v. Italy judgment of 10 December 1982, Series A no. 56, p. 18, para. 53). - EGMR, 13.07.1983 - 8737/79
Zimmermann und Steiner ./. Schweiz
Auszug aus EKMR, 02.07.1997 - 31004/96
Furthermore, the Government recall that a temporary backlog of court business does not involve liability on the part of the Contracting States provided that they take, with the requisite promptness, remedial action to deal with an exceptional situation of this kind (cf. Eur. Court HR, Zimmermann and Steiner v. Switzerland judgment of 13 July 1983, Series A no. 66, pp. 12-13, paras. 29-30; Guincho v. Portugal judgment of 10 July 1984, Series A no. 81, pp. 13-17, paras. 29-32 and 37-41). - EGMR, 10.07.1984 - 8990/80
GUINCHO c. PORTUGAL
Auszug aus EKMR, 02.07.1997 - 31004/96
Furthermore, the Government recall that a temporary backlog of court business does not involve liability on the part of the Contracting States provided that they take, with the requisite promptness, remedial action to deal with an exceptional situation of this kind (cf. Eur. Court HR, Zimmermann and Steiner v. Switzerland judgment of 13 July 1983, Series A no. 66, pp. 12-13, paras. 29-30; Guincho v. Portugal judgment of 10 July 1984, Series A no. 81, pp. 13-17, paras. 29-32 and 37-41). - EKMR, 21.05.1997 - 26209/95
MR. T.K. AND MRS. T.K. v. HUNGARY
Auszug aus EKMR, 02.07.1997 - 31004/96
The Commission recalls that, subsequent to protracted civil court proceedings, a further civil action does not provide direct and speedy redress; in the present case, an official liability action cannot be regarded as an effective remedy, which the applicant is required to exhaust (cf. No. 26209/95, T.K. and T.K. v. Hungary, Dec. 21.5.97, unpublished).