Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  X. v. AUSTRIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  X. c. AUTRICHE

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (12)

• EGMR, 05.02.2015 - 22251/08

  BOCHAN v. UKRAINE (No. 2)

  L'article 6 leur est donc jugé inapplicable (voir, parmi bien d'autres précédents, X c. Autriche, no 7761/77, décision de la Commission du 8 mai 1978, D.R. 14, p. 171 ; Surmont et de Meurechy c. Belgique, nos 13601/88 et 13602/88, décision de la Commision du 6 juillet 1989, D.R. 62, p. 284 ; J.F. c. France (déc.) no 39616/98, 20 avril 1999 ; Zawadzki c. Pologne (déc.), no 34158/96, 6 juillet 1999 ; Sonnleitner c. Autriche (déc.) no 34813/97, 6 janvier 2000 ; Sablon c. Belgique, no 36445/97, § 86, 10 avril 2001 ; Valentin Gorizdra c. Moldova (déc.) no 53180/99, 2 juillet 2002 ; Kucera c. Autriche, no 40072/98, 3 octobre 2002 ; Fischer, décision précitée ; Jussy c. France, no 42277/98, § 18, 8 avril 2003 ; Dankevitch c. Ukraine, no 40679/98, 29 avril 2003 ; Steck-Risch et autres, décision précitée ; Öcalan, décision précitée ; Schelling (no 2), décision précitée ; Hurter c. Suisse (déc.), no 48111/07, 15 mai 2012, et Dybeku c. Albanie (déc.), no 557/12, § 30, 11 mars 2014).
• EKMR, 18.10.1995 - 23806/94

  KLEINBICHLER v. AUSTRIA

  The Commission, recalling its constant case-law that Article 6 (Art. 6) does not apply to proceedings concerning the reopening of a trial, finds that only the new proceedings, after the reopening has been granted, can be regarded as concerning the determination of a criminal charge (No. 7761/77, Dec. 8.5.87, D.R. 14, p. 173 with further references).
• EKMR, 05.07.1995 - 21967/93

  SÁRKOZI v. HUNGARY

  As regards the proceedings concerning the applicant's request for a reopening of the criminal proceedings, the Commission recalls that Article 6 (Art. 6) does not apply to such proceedings given the fact that someone who applies for his case to be reopened and whose sentence has become final is not charged with a criminal offence within the meaning of the said Article (Art. 6) (cf. No. 7761/77, Dec. 8.5.78, D.R 14 p. 171).

 
• EKMR, 16.05.1995 - 23727/94

  OBERSCHLICK v. AUSTRIA

  The Commission recalls that Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention does not apply to proceedings for the re-opening of criminal proceedings given that someone who applies for his case to be reopened and whose sentence has become final is not "charged with a criminal offence" within the meaning of the said Article (No. 7761/77, Dec. 8.5.78, D.R. 14 p. 171).
• EGMR, 04.09.2003 - 13338/03

  AO

  However, the Court recalls in this connection that the Convention does not guarantee a right to re-open proceedings in a particular case (see, inter alia, X. v. Austria, no. 7761/77, Commission decision of 8 May 1978, Decisions and Reports (DR) 14, pp.
• EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21863/93

  TRØBER v. NORWAY

  Furthermore, in accordance with the Commission's established case-law, proceedings concerning applications for retrial fall outside the scope of Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention, since a person applying for a retrial, having been finally convicted of a criminal offence, is no longer a person charged with that offence within the meaning of that Article (see e.g. No. 7761/77, Dec. 8.5.78, D.R. 14 p. 171).
• EKMR, 17.01.1995 - 19254/92

  PILET v. SWITZERLAND

  However, proceedings concerning the reopening of previous proceedings do not fall under the guarantees of Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention (see No. 7761/77, Dec. 8.5.78, D.R. 14 p. 171).
• EKMR, 12.10.1994 - 19544/92

  KÜÇÜK v. GERMANY

  Furthermore the proceedings concerning applications for retrial do not involve the determination of a civil right or a criminal charge within the meaning of Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention (cf. No. 7761/77, Dec. 8.5.78, D.R. 14 pp. 171, 173).
• EKMR, 15.10.1991 - 13129/87

  FRICK c. AUTRICHE

  The Commission finally observes that Article 6 (Art. 6) partly not applicable to proceedings determining the admissibility of a request for the re-opening of criminal proceedings (cf. No. 7761/77, Dec. of 8.5.78, D.R. 14, 171 with further references).
• EKMR, 04.05.1987 - 11863/85

  A. B. v. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

  In so far as the applicant submits that this confrontation could be of relevance to his request for a retrial in relation to an offence of which he had previously been convicted, the Commission recalls its constant case-law according to which Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention does not apply to proceedings concerning requests for retrial, given that someone who applies for his case to be re-opened after his conviction has become final, is not someone "charged with a criminal offence" within the meaning of the said Article (see e.g. No. 864/60, Dec. 10.3.62, C.D. 9 p. 17 ; No. 1237/61, Dec. 5.3.62, Yearbook 5 p. 96 ; No. 7761/77, Dec. 8.5.78, D.R. 14 p. 171 ).
• EKMR, 17.01.1996 - 24738/94

  KAUKONEN v. FINLAND
• EKMR, 16.05.1995 - 21655/93