Rechtsprechung
| EKMR, 27.11.1996 - 22340/93 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1996,26056) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
W.N. v. AUSTRIA
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 16.07.1971 - 2614/65
RINGEISEN v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EKMR, 27.11.1996 - 22340/93
The Commission recalls that it cannot be stated as a general rule resulting from the obligation to be impartial that a superior court which set aside an administrative or judicial decision is bound to send the case back to a different jurisdictional authority or to a differently composed branch of that authority (Eur. Court HR., Ringeisen v. Austria judgment of 16 July 1971, Series A no. 13, p. 40, para. 97; Diennet v. France judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 325-A, paras. 37-38). - EKMR, 09.03.1989 - 11763/85
BANER c. SUEDE
Auszug aus EKMR, 27.11.1996 - 22340/93
The Commission recalls that the period of six months runs from the date of the final domestic decision after effective and sufficient remedies have been used (cf. No. 11763/85, Dec. 9.3.89, D.R. 60 p. 128). - EGMR, 24.11.1986 - 9063/80
GILLOW v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 27.11.1996 - 22340/93
Further, the Commission notes that it is common in the Convention countries that higher courts deal with similar or related cases in turn and that the European Court has found this unobjectionable from the point of view of the right to a fair trial (Eur. Court H.R, Gillow v. United Kingdom judgment of 24 November 1986, Series A no. 109, p. 28, para. 73). - EGMR, 24.05.1989 - 10486/83
HAUSCHILDT c. DANEMARK
Auszug aus EKMR, 27.11.1996 - 22340/93
1 (Art. 6-1) must be determined according to a subjective test, that is on the basis of the personal conviction of a particular judge in a given case, and also according to an objective test, that is ascertaining whether the judge offered guarantees sufficient to exclude any legitimate doubt in this respect (Eur. Court H.R., Hauschildt v. Denmark judgment of 24 May 1989, Series A no. 154, p. 21, para. 46; Thomann v. Switzerland judgment of 10 June 1996, Reports 1996, para. 30). - EGMR, 26.09.1995 - 18160/91
DIENNET v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EKMR, 27.11.1996 - 22340/93
The Commission recalls that it cannot be stated as a general rule resulting from the obligation to be impartial that a superior court which set aside an administrative or judicial decision is bound to send the case back to a different jurisdictional authority or to a differently composed branch of that authority (Eur. Court HR., Ringeisen v. Austria judgment of 16 July 1971, Series A no. 13, p. 40, para. 97; Diennet v. France judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 325-A, paras. 37-38).