Webinar: Kostenloses Webinar zum neuen KI-Assistenten am Di. den 27. Oktober 2026 11:30 Uhr Unverbindlich anmelden
×
×
Doctrine-WebinarNicht verpassen
Kostenloses Webinar zum neuen KI-Assistenten am Di. den 27. Oktober 2026 11:30 - 12:00 Uhr Unverbindlich anmelden
Weitere Entscheidung unten: EGMR, 25.03.2008

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 53084/99, 28222/06, 33820/04, 30395/04, 55520/00, 22892/03, 22721/04, 4171/03, 42277/04, 38321/03, 11549/02, 23310/04, 10929/03, 20882/04, 34171/04, 10994/05, 24427/02, 39898/03, 5507/06, 76964/01, 76835/01, 25224/04, 44374/04, 24827/06, 44436/06, 12049/0   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2017,20450
EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 53084/99, 28222/06, 33820/04, 30395/04, 55520/00, 22892/03, 22721/04, 4171/03, 42277/04, 38321/03, 11549/02, 23310/04, 10929/03, 20882/04, 34171/04, 10994/05, 24427/02, 39898/03, 5507/06, 76964/01, 76835/01, 25224/04, 44374/04, 24827/06, 44436/06, 12049/0 (https://dejure.org/2017,20450)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 07.06.2017 - 53084/99, 28222/06, 33820/04, 30395/04, 55520/00, 22892/03, 22721/04, 4171/03, 42277/04, 38321/03, 11549/02, 23310/04, 10929/03, 20882/04, 34171/04, 10994/05, 24427/02, 39898/03, 5507/06, 76964/01, 76835/01, 25224/04, 44374/04, 24827/06, 44436/06, 12049/0 (https://dejure.org/2017,20450)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 07. Juni 2017 - 53084/99, 28222/06, 33820/04, 30395/04, 55520/00, 22892/03, 22721/04, 4171/03, 42277/04, 38321/03, 11549/02, 23310/04, 10929/03, 20882/04, 34171/04, 10994/05, 24427/02, 39898/03, 5507/06, 76964/01, 76835/01, 25224/04, 44374/04, 24827/06, 44436/06, 12049/0 (https://dejure.org/2017,20450)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,20450) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KORMACHEVA ET 105 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA RUSSIE

    Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises permettant d'éviter de nouvelles violations. Versement des sommes prévues dans l'arrêt (französisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KORMACHEVA AND 105 OTHER CASES AGAINST RUSSIA

    Information given by the government concerning measures taken to prevent new violations. Payment of the sums provided for in the judgment (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

  • EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 53084/99
  • EGMR, 29.01.2004 - 53084/99
  • EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 53084/99, 28222/06, 33820/04, 30395/04, 55520/00, 22892/03, 22721/04, 4171/03, 42277/04, 38321/03, 11549/02, 23310/04, 10929/03, 20882/04, 34171/04, 10994/05, 24427/02, 39898/03, 5507/06, 76964/01, 76835/01, 25224/04, 44374/04, 24827/06, 44436/06, 12049/0
 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (14)Zitiert selbst (138)

  • KAGH, 07.06.2013 - M 22/12

    Zustimmung der MAV beim Einsatz von Dienstleistungskräften (Anästhesieteam) - zum …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 53084/99
    22/12/2009.

    22/12/2009.

    22/12/2009.

    22/12/2005.

    22/12/2005.

    22/12/2009.

    22/12/2005.

    22/12/2006.

    22/12/2006.

    22/12/2005.

    22/12/2009.

    22/12/2005.

  • EGMR, 16.10.2007 - 11/04

    VOTTO c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 53084/99
    11/04/2013.

    11/04/2013.

    11/04/2007.

    11/04/2013.

    11/04/2013.

    11/04/2013.

    11/04/2007.

    11/04/2013.

  • VGH der UEK, 14.11.2005 - 13/04
    Auszug aus EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 53084/99
    13/04/2005.

    13/04/2011.

    13/04/2011.

    13/04/2005.

    13/04/2011.

    13/04/2011.

    13/04/2006.

  • EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

    MISSENJOV v. ESTONIA

    As concerns the possibility to lodge a complaint with a view to initiating disciplinary proceedings against the judges, the Court is unable to see that such a course would have expedited the proceedings (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, § 62, 29 January 2004).
  • EGMR, 22.09.2005 - 3734/02

    SOKOLOV v. RUSSIA

    It notes that the Government did not indicate any remedy that could have expedited the determination of the applicant's case or provided him with adequate redress for delays that had already occurred (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, 29 January 2004, § 64).
  • EGMR, 26.07.2007 - 31585/02

    BENYAMINSON v. UKRAINE

    Nor could this remedy provide the applicant with any substantive redress for delays (see, mutatis mutandis, Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, § 63, 29 January 2004).
  • EGMR, 01.04.2010 - 4543/04

    GEORGIY NIKOLAYEVICH MIKHAYLOV v. RUSSIA

    In so far as the Government may be understood to claim that the applicant's failure to complain to the Judiciary Qualification Board about the excessive length of the civil proceedings amounted to non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, the Court notes that it has already found that an application to the Judiciary Qualification Board is not an effective remedy against the excessive length of proceedings (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, §§ 61 and 62, 29 January 2004, and Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 50, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 15.06.2006 - 22892/03

    BAKIYEVETS v. RUSSIA

    It notes that the Government did not indicate any remedy that could have expedited the determination of the applicant's case or provided him with adequate redress for delays that had already occurred (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, 29 January 2004, § 64).
  • EGMR, 25.06.2009 - 42046/06

    ZAYTSEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    It notes that the Government did not indicate any remedy that could have expedited the determination of the first applicant's case or provided him with adequate redress for the delays that had already occurred (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, 29 January 2004, § 64).
  • EGMR, 14.06.2007 - 28639/03

    SAVENKO v. RUSSIA

    It notes that the Government did not indicate any remedy that could have expedited the determination of the applicant's case or provided her with adequate redress for delays that had already occurred (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, 29 January 2004, § 64).
  • EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 36045/02

    SHNEYDERMAN v. RUSSIA

    It notes that the Government did not indicate any remedy that could have expedited the determination of the applicant's case or provided him with adequate redress for delays that had already occurred (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, 29 January 2004, § 64).
  • EGMR, 12.10.2006 - 10929/03

    GLAZKOV v. RUSSIA

    It notes that the Government did not indicate any remedy that could have expedited the determination of the applicant's case or provided him with adequate redress for delays that had already occurred (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, 29 January 2004, § 64).
  • EGMR, 15.06.2006 - 4171/03

    CHEVKIN v. RUSSIA

    It notes that the Government did not indicate any remedy that could have expedited the determination of the applicant's case or provided him with adequate redress for delays that had already occurred (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, 29 January 2004, § 64).
  • EGMR, 22.12.2005 - 14983/04

    RYBAKOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 23.09.2004 - 60408/00

    YEMANAKOVA v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 03.06.2010 - 20441/02

    LELIK v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 18.06.2009 - 13458/07

    VDOVINA v. RUSSIA

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
dejure.org Übersicht EGMR

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2008,56962
EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,56962)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 25.03.2008 - 11549/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,56962)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 25. März 2008 - 11549/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,56962)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2008,56962) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (19)Zitiert selbst (17)

  • EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 36494/02

    PETRUSHKO v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    In any event, the Court reiterates that a person who has obtained an enforceable judgment against the State as a result of successful litigation cannot be required to resort to enforcement proceedings in order to have it executed (see Koltsov v. Russia, no. 41304/02, § 16, 24 February 2005; Petrushko v. Russia, no. 36494/02, § 18, 24 February 2005; and Metaxas v. Greece, no. 8415/02, § 19, 27 May 2004).

    The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in cases raising issues similar to the ones in the present case (see Reynbakh v. Russia, no. 23405/03, § 23 et seq., 29 September 2005; Gizzatova v. Russia, no. 5124/03, § 19 et seq., 13 January 2005; Petrushko v. Russia, no. 36494/02, § 23 et seq., 24 February 2005; Gorokhov and Rusyayev v. Russia, no. 38305/02, § 30 et seq., 17 March 2005; Wasserman v. Russia, no. 15021/02, § 35 et seq., 18 November 2004; Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 34 et seq., ECHR 2002-III).

  • EGMR, 17.03.2005 - 38305/02

    GOROKHOV AND RUSYAYEV v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    It follows that the domestic authorities should have treated the applicant's case with special diligence (compare Gorokhov and Rusyayev v. Russia, no. 38305/02, § 34, 17 March 2005).

    The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in cases raising issues similar to the ones in the present case (see Reynbakh v. Russia, no. 23405/03, § 23 et seq., 29 September 2005; Gizzatova v. Russia, no. 5124/03, § 19 et seq., 13 January 2005; Petrushko v. Russia, no. 36494/02, § 23 et seq., 24 February 2005; Gorokhov and Rusyayev v. Russia, no. 38305/02, § 30 et seq., 17 March 2005; Wasserman v. Russia, no. 15021/02, § 35 et seq., 18 November 2004; Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 34 et seq., ECHR 2002-III).

  • EGMR, 25.11.2003 - 41431/98

    WIERCISZEWSKA v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    Moreover, with regard to the repeated quashing of the lower courts" decisions, the Court recalls that since the remittal of cases for re-examination is usually ordered as a result of errors committed by lower authorities, the repetition of such orders within one set of proceedings discloses a deficiency in the operation of the legal system (see, mutatis mutandis, Wierciszewska v. Poland, no. 41431/98, § 46, 25 November 2003).
  • EGMR, 27.05.2004 - 8415/02

    METAXAS c. GRECE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    In any event, the Court reiterates that a person who has obtained an enforceable judgment against the State as a result of successful litigation cannot be required to resort to enforcement proceedings in order to have it executed (see Koltsov v. Russia, no. 41304/02, § 16, 24 February 2005; Petrushko v. Russia, no. 36494/02, § 18, 24 February 2005; and Metaxas v. Greece, no. 8415/02, § 19, 27 May 2004).
  • EGMR, 13.01.2005 - 5124/03

    GIZZATOVA v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in cases raising issues similar to the ones in the present case (see Reynbakh v. Russia, no. 23405/03, § 23 et seq., 29 September 2005; Gizzatova v. Russia, no. 5124/03, § 19 et seq., 13 January 2005; Petrushko v. Russia, no. 36494/02, § 23 et seq., 24 February 2005; Gorokhov and Rusyayev v. Russia, no. 38305/02, § 30 et seq., 17 March 2005; Wasserman v. Russia, no. 15021/02, § 35 et seq., 18 November 2004; Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 34 et seq., ECHR 2002-III).
  • EGMR, 25.09.2007 - 42165/02

    HADRABOVA v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    Incomplete and therefore misleading information may also amount to abuse of the right of application, especially if the information concerns the very core of the case and no sufficient explanation is given for the failure to disclose that information (see Hadrabová v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 42165/02, 25 September 2007, with further references).
  • EGMR, 18.11.2004 - 15021/02

    WASSERMAN v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in cases raising issues similar to the ones in the present case (see Reynbakh v. Russia, no. 23405/03, § 23 et seq., 29 September 2005; Gizzatova v. Russia, no. 5124/03, § 19 et seq., 13 January 2005; Petrushko v. Russia, no. 36494/02, § 23 et seq., 24 February 2005; Gorokhov and Rusyayev v. Russia, no. 38305/02, § 30 et seq., 17 March 2005; Wasserman v. Russia, no. 15021/02, § 35 et seq., 18 November 2004; Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 34 et seq., ECHR 2002-III).
  • EGMR, 29.09.2005 - 23405/03

    REYNBAKH v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in cases raising issues similar to the ones in the present case (see Reynbakh v. Russia, no. 23405/03, § 23 et seq., 29 September 2005; Gizzatova v. Russia, no. 5124/03, § 19 et seq., 13 January 2005; Petrushko v. Russia, no. 36494/02, § 23 et seq., 24 February 2005; Gorokhov and Rusyayev v. Russia, no. 38305/02, § 30 et seq., 17 March 2005; Wasserman v. Russia, no. 15021/02, § 35 et seq., 18 November 2004; Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 34 et seq., ECHR 2002-III).
  • EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 41304/02

    KOLTSOV v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    In any event, the Court reiterates that a person who has obtained an enforceable judgment against the State as a result of successful litigation cannot be required to resort to enforcement proceedings in order to have it executed (see Koltsov v. Russia, no. 41304/02, § 16, 24 February 2005; Petrushko v. Russia, no. 36494/02, § 18, 24 February 2005; and Metaxas v. Greece, no. 8415/02, § 19, 27 May 2004).
  • EGMR, 22.09.2005 - 3734/02

    SOKOLOV v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.2008 - 11549/02
    Although two hearings were adjourned following his requests that the case be examined with the participation of lay judges and that additional witnesses be examined by the court, the applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of the resources afforded by national law in the defence of his interests (see, among others, Sokolov v. Russia, no. 3734/02, § 38, 22 September 2005).
  • EGMR, 09.10.2003 - 15085/02

    CEKIC and OTHERS v. CROATIA

  • EGMR, 28.09.2006 - 32786/03

    SILCHENKO v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 05.10.2006 - 29510/04

    MARCHENKO v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 21.09.2006 - 3852/02

    UGLANOVA v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 02.11.2006 - 26410/02

    KAZARTSEV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96
  • OLG Hamburg, 18.01.2010 - 13 W 28/09

    Grundbucheintragung bei Zuerwerb von Wohnungseigentum: Nachverpfändung von …

  • EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 53084/99

    KORMACHEVA ET 105 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA RUSSIE

    11549/02.

    11549/02.

  • EGMR, 03.03.2011 - 6110/03

    KUPTSOV AND KUPTSOVA v. RUSSIA

    The resulting delay in the proceedings is attributable to the conduct of the domestic authorities (see, mutatis mutandis, Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008, and Uglanova v. Russia, no. 3852/02, § 34, 21 September 2006).
  • EGMR, 25.11.2010 - 30271/03

    IVAN KUZMIN v. RUSSIA

    Although the Court is not in a position to analyse the juridical quality of the domestic courts' decisions, it considers that, since remittal of cases for re-examination is frequently ordered as a result of errors committed by lower courts, the repetition of such orders within one set of proceedings may disclose a serious deficiency in the judicial system (see, mutatis mutandis, Wierciszewska v. Poland, no. 41431/98, § 46, 25 November 2003; Matica v. Romania, no. 19567/02, § 24, 2 November 2006; and Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 21.04.2016 - 32913/03

    TOPALLAJ v. ALBANIA

    Given that the remittal of the case for re-examination was frequently ordered as a result of errors committed by the lower courts, the repetition of such remittal orders discloses a deficiency in the judicial system, which deficiency alone prevented the applicant from having his "civil rights and obligations", as at issue in the proceedings in question, determined within a reasonable time (see Wierciszewska v. Poland, no. 41431/98, § 46, 25 November 2003; Matica v. Romania, no. 19567/02, § 24, 2 November 2006; and Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 19.06.2014 - 39814/04

    PALACHEVA v. RUSSIA

    Although the Court is not in a position to analyse the juridical quality of the domestic courts" decisions, it considers that the multiple repetition of re-examination orders within the same set of proceedings may disclose a deficiency in the judicial system (see Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 09.02.2016 - 24130/04

    [ENG]

    Although the Court is not in a position to analyse the juridical quality of the domestic courts' decisions, it considers that the multiple repetition of re-examination orders within the same set of proceedings may disclose a deficiency in the judicial system (see Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 13.01.2011 - 19440/05

    [ENG]

    Although the Court is not in a position to analyse the juridical quality of the domestic courts" decisions, it considers that multiple repetition of re-examination orders within one set of proceedings may disclose a deficiency in the judicial system (see Wierciszewska v. Poland, no. 41431/98, § 46, 25 November 2003; Matica v. Romania, no. 19567/02, § 24, 2 November 2006; and Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 15.07.2010 - 25270/06

    [ENG]

    Although the Court is not in a position to analyse the juridical quality of the domestic courts' decisions, it considers that multiple repetition of re-examination orders within one set of proceedings may disclose a deficiency in the judicial system (see Wierciszewska v. Poland, no. 41431/98, § 46, 25 November 2003; Matica v. Romania, no. 19567/02, § 24, 2 November 2006; and Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 4487/04

    [ENG]

    Although the Court is not in a position to analyse the juridical quality of the domestic courts" decisions, it considers that, since the remittal of cases for re-examination is frequently ordered as a result of errors committed by lower courts, the repetition of such orders within one set of proceedings may disclose a serious deficiency in the judicial system (see Wierciszewska v. Poland, no. 41431/98, § 46, 25 November 2003; Matica v. Romania, no. 19567/02, § 24, 2 November 2006; and Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 07.11.2017 - 16200/04

    [ENG]

    According to the Court's well-established jurisprudence, the multiple repetition of re-examination orders within the same set of proceedings may disclose a deficiency in the judicial system (see Falimonov v. Russia, no. 11549/02, § 58, 25 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 11.04.2013 - 9311/05

    [ENG]

  • EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 11769/04

    KRYUK v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 04.03.2010 - 22721/04

    [ENG]

  • EGMR, 13.01.2011 - 25224/04

    [ENG]

  • EGMR, 27.10.2009 - 21377/04

    ER v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 9522/03

    BALTUTAN AND ANO INSAAT VE TICARET LTD. STI v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 18.06.2009 - 33896/04

    SOKOREV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 20578/05

    [ENG]

  • EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 6705/07

    LEBEDEV c. RUSSIE

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
dejure.org Übersicht EGMR
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht