Rechtsprechung
| EKMR, 29.11.1995 - 25534/94 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1995,23646) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
POTTS v. GERMANY
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (2)
- EGMR, 21.09.1993 - 12350/86
KREMZOW v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EKMR, 29.11.1995 - 25534/94
As regards the question of the applicant's presence at the hearing on his appeal on points of law, the Commission considers that, having regard to the nature of review exercised by the Federal Court of Justice, the presence of the accused, who is legally represented, is not generally required either by paragraph 1 or 3 (c) of Article 6 (Art. 6-1, 6-3-c) (cf., mutatis mutandis, Eur. Court H.R., Kremzow judgment of 21 September 1993, Series A no. 268-B, p. 44, para. 63). - EGMR, 24.11.1986 - 9120/80
UNTERPERTINGER v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EKMR, 29.11.1995 - 25534/94
It seems appropriate to look at these complaints from the points of view of paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 6 taken together (Art. 6-1+6-3), especially as the guarantees in paragraph 3 represent aspects of the concept of a fair trial contained in paragraph 1 (Eur. Court H.R., Unterpertinger judgment of 24 November 1986, Series A no. 110, p. 14, para. 29).