Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KINGSTON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. a, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 7, Art. 7 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 24.11.1986 - 9120/80

  UNTERPERTINGER v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27837/95

  3 of Article 6 (Art. 6-3) are but specific features of the more general right to a fair trial provided for within paragraph 1 (see inter alia Unterpertinger v. Austria judgment of 24 November 1986, Series A no. 110, p. 14, para. 29; and T v. Italy judgment of 12 October 1992, Series A no. 245-C, p. 41, para. 25).
• EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13071/87

  EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27837/95

  The Commission notes that it is not, as a general rule, within the purview of the Commission to gainsay the assessment of the domestic courts as to relevance of the evidence which was before them, save where it is apparent that the approach of the court in making its assessment was arbitrary or capricious and such as to render the proceedings, taken as a whole, unfair (see inter alia Vidal v. Belgium, loc. cit., pp. 32 - 33, paras. 33 - 34; Edwards v. the United Kingdom judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 247-B, pp. 34-35, para. 34; and Saïdi v. France judgment of 20 September 1993, Series A no. 261-C, p. 56, para. 43).
• EGMR, 12.10.1992 - 14104/88

  T. c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27837/95

  3 of Article 6 (Art. 6-3) are but specific features of the more general right to a fair trial provided for within paragraph 1 (see inter alia Unterpertinger v. Austria judgment of 24 November 1986, Series A no. 110, p. 14, para. 29; and T v. Italy judgment of 12 October 1992, Series A no. 245-C, p. 41, para. 25).

 
• EGMR, 22.04.1992 - 12351/86

  VIDAL c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27837/95

  The Commission recalls that in the context of Article 6 (Art. 6) the overriding question is whether the proceedings when considered in their entirety, including any appeal proceedings, were fair (see inter alia Vidal v. Belgium judgment of 22 April 1992, Series A no. 235-B, pp. 32 - 33, para. 33, and Helmers v. Sweden judgment of 29 October 1991, Series A no. 212, p. 15, para. 31).
• EGMR, 24.11.1994 - 17621/91

  KEMMACHE v. FRANCE (No. 3)

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27837/95

  The Commission further recalls that it is in the first place for the courts to interpret and apply domestic law since they are in the nature of things particularly qualified to settle issues arising in this connection (see Eur. Court HR, Kemmache v. France (No. 3) judgment of 24 November 1994, Series A no. 296-C, p. 87, para.
• EGMR, 22.11.1995 - 20166/92

  S.W. c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27837/95

  The Commission recalls that Article 7 para.1 (Art. 7-1) is to be construed and applied, as follows from its object and purpose, in such a way as to provide effective safeguards against arbitrary prosecution and conviction (see Eur. Court HR, S.W. v. the United Kingdom judgment of 22 November 1995, Series A no. 335-B, p. 41, para. 34; and C.R. v. the United Kingdom judgment of 22 November 1995, Series A no. 335-C, p. 68, para. 32).