Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ZELENKEVICH AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Zelenkevich and Others v. Russia

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Zitiert selbst (9)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 15.02.2007 - 30671/03

  BORIS VASILYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  Having regard to its finding of violations of Article 6 on account of the quashing of the judgments in supervisory-review proceeding, the Court finds that it is not necessary to examine separately the issue of their subsequent non-enforcement by the authorities (see Boris Vasilyev v. Russia, no. 30671/03, §§ 41-42, 15 February 2007, and Sizintseva and Others, cited above, § 39).
• EGMR, 08.12.1999 - 28541/95

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  Referring to the case of Pellegrin v. France [GC], no. 28541/95, ECHR 1999-VIII, the Government argued that the applicants" complaint under Article 6 was incompatible ratione materiae with the Convention insofar as the applicants were military officers.
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 52854/99

  RIABYKH c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  A departure from that principle is justified only when made necessary by circumstances of a substantial and compelling character, such as correction of fundamental defects or miscarriage of justice (see Brumarescu v. Romania [GC], no. 28342/95, § 61, ECHR 1999-VII, and Ryabykh v. Russia, no. 52854/99, §§ 51-52, ECHR 2003-IX).

• EGMR, 18.01.2007 - 20887/03

  KOT v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  The Court further reiterates its constant approach that in the absence of a fundamental defect in the proceedings that have been concluded by a final and lengthy judgment party's disagreement with the assessment made by the first-instance and appeal courts is not a circumstance of a substantial and compelling character warranting the quashing of that judgment and re-opening of the proceedings on the applicant's claim (see Dovguchits, cited above, § 30, and Kot v. Russia, no. 20887/03, § 29, 18 January 2007).
• EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 2999/03

  DOVGUCHITS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  The Court notes that it has already considered the argument submitted by the Government and rejected it in previous similar cases (see Tetsen v. Russia, no. 11589/04, § 18, 3 April 2008, and Dovguchits v. Russia, no. 2999/03, § 19, 7 June 2007).
• EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 41145/02

  PRESNYAKOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  Consequently, the length of enforcement procedure calculated up to this day was less than one year, which is not excessive in view of the Court's case-law (see Presnyakov v. Russia (dec.), no. 41145/02, 10 November 2005).
• EGMR, 03.04.2008 - 11589/04

  TETSEN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  The Court notes that it has already considered the argument submitted by the Government and rejected it in previous similar cases (see Tetsen v. Russia, no. 11589/04, § 18, 3 April 2008, and Dovguchits v. Russia, no. 2999/03, § 19, 7 June 2007).
• EGMR, 08.04.2010 - 38585/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  The Court has found in many cases that the quashing of binding and enforceable judgments by way of supervisory review frustrated the applicants" reliance on the binding judicial decision and deprived them of an opportunity to receive the money they had legitimately expected to receive (see, among others, Sizintseva and Others v. Russia, nos. 38585/04 et al., § 35, 8 April 2010).
• EGMR, 05.04.2005 - 48758/99

  VOLKOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 14805/02

  The Court finds that, having concluded that there had been an infringement of the applicants" "right to a court" by the very use of the supervisory review procedure, it is not necessary to consider whether the procedural guarantees of Article 6 of the Convention were available in those proceedings (see Volkova v. Russia, no. 48758/99, § 39, 5 April 2005).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 10.03.2017 - 52854/99

  RYABYKH AND 112 OTHER CASES AGAINST RUSSIA

  14805/02.

  14805/02.

• EGMR, 12.07.2016 - 41337/04

  [ENG]

  The Court observes that it has already found numerous violations of the Convention on account of the quashing of final judgments by way of supervisory review under the Code of Civil Procedure, as in force at the material time (see, among many other authorities, Kot, cited above, § 29; Kovalenko and Others v. Russia, [Committee], nos. 36299/03, 14222/04, 15030/04, 36581/04, 1407/05, 2071/05 and 24618/05, 8 December 2015; and Zelenkevich and Others v. Russia, [Committee], no. 14805/02, 20 June 2013).
• EGMR, 25.04.2017 - 20707/06

  ISAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Some of those violations were found in similar circumstances and similarly concerned the quashing of final domestic judgments making awards (see, among many other authorities, Kovalenko and Others, cited above, and Zelenkevich and Others v. Russia, [Committee], no. 14805/02, 20 June 2013).

• EGMR, 09.02.2016 - 24130/04

  [ENG]

  Some of these violations were found in similar circumstances and similarly concerned the quashing of final domestic judgments awarding various benefits to retired military servicemen (see Zelenkevich and Others v. Russia, [Committee], no. 14805/02, 20 June 2013).
• EGMR, 13.06.2017 - 42968/06

  SHOROKHOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Some of those violations were found in similar circumstances and similarly concerned the quashing of final domestic judgments making awards (see, among many other authorities, Kovalenko and Others, [Committee], nos. 36299/03 and 6 others, 8 December 2015; Zelenkevich and Others v. Russia, [Committee], no. 14805/02, 20 June 2013; and, on account of the lack of jurisdiction of the court, Miroshnikov and Others v. Russia, [Committee], nos. 20750/04 and 2 others, § 15, 27 September 2016).
• EGMR, 13.06.2017 - 3141/08

  FOMIN AND SIVAYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Some of those violations were found in similar circumstances and similarly concerned the quashing of final domestic judgments making awards (see, among many other authorities, Kovalenko and Others v. Russia, [Committee], nos. 36299/03 and 6 others, 8 December 2015, and Zelenkevich and Others v. Russia, [Committee], no. 14805/02, 20 June 2013).
• EGMR, 04.04.2017 - 17229/06

  SADKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Some of those violations were found in similar circumstances and similarly concerned the quashing of final domestic judgments making awards (see, among many other authorities, Kovalenko and Others, cited above, and Zelenkevich and Others v. Russia, [Committee], no. 14805/02, 20 June 2013).
• EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 6131/07

  KOROBEYNIKOV v. RUSSIA

  Some of those violations were found in similar circumstances and similarly concerned the quashing of final domestic judgments making awards in respect of social benefits (see, among many other authorities, Kovalenko and Others, [Committee], nos. 36299/03 and 6 others, 8 December 2015; Zelenkevich and Others v. Russia, [Committee], no. 14805/02, 20 June 2013; and, on account of the social benefit certificates, Fomin and Sivayeva v. Russia, no. 3141/08, 16 June 2017).