Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AKTAY v. TÜRKIYE

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  AKTAY v. TURKEY and 2 applications

  Art. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Zitiert selbst (15)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 44759/98

  Verletzung des Rechts auf ein faires Verfahren durch überlange Verfahrensdauer; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  Rn. 45 As to the pecuniary nature of the fines in question, the Court reiterates that merely showing that a dispute is "pecuniary" in nature is not in itself sufficient to attract the applicability of Article 6 § 1 under its "civil" head (see Ferrazzini v. Italy [GC], no. 44759/98, § 25, ECHR 2001-VII, and Albert v. Romania, no. 31911/03, § 28, 16 February 2010).
• KAG Freiburg, 10.12.2010 - 10/09

  Kostentragungspflicht der DCV als Dienstgeber für die durch die Teilnahme an …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  10/09/2016.
• EGMR, 25.09.2018 - 76639/11

  Denisov v. Ukraine

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  Furthermore, the result of the proceedings must be directly decisive for the right in question, mere tenuous connections or remote consequences not being sufficient to bring Article 6 § 1 into play (see, among others, Grzęda, cited above, § 257, and Denisov v. Ukraine [GC], no. 76639/11, § 44, 25 September 2018, with further references).

• EGMR, 15.03.2022 - 43572/18

  GRZĘDA v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  Rn. 31 The Court refers to the general principles concerning the applicability of the civil limb of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as summarised in Grzęda v. Poland ([GC], no. 43572/18, §§ 257-59, 15 March 2022).
• EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 37685/10

  RADOMILJA AND OTHERS v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  Rn. 17 The Court, being master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of a case (see Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, §§ 114 and 126, 20 March 2018, and Angerjärv and Greinoman v. Estonia, nos.
• EGMR - 68271/14 (anhängig)

  HALL v. ICELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  Such rules derive from the indispensable power of a court to ensure the proper and orderly functioning of its own proceedings (see, mutatis mutandis, Gestur Jónsson and Ragnar Halldór Hall v. Iceland [GC], nos. 68273/14 and 68271/14, §§ 81 and 89, 22 December 2020).
• EGMR, 04.10.2022 - 16358/18

  ANGERJÄRV v. ESTONIA and 1 other application

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  16358/18 and 34964/18, §§ 59-60, 4 October 2022), considers that the complaints fall to be examined solely under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the relevant part of which reads as follows:.
• EGMR, 31.05.2011 - 3699/08

  Žugic ./. Kroatien

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  Both the former Commission and the Court have examined the applicability of the civil limb of Article 6 in the context of fines imposed on the parties to legal proceedings for abuse of process or contempt of court, and found that such fines aim to ensure the proper administration of justice and therefore have the characteristics of procedural sanctions that do not involve the determination of civil rights or obligations (see, for example, Veriter v. France, no. 25308/94, Commission decision of 2 September 1996, Decisions and Reports 86-B, p. 101; Schreiber and Boetsch v. France (dec.), no. 58751/00, ECHR 2003-XII; and Žugić v. Croatia, no. 3699/08, § 63, 31 May 2011).
• EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 79821/12

  MARUSIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  Therefore, the question of good reputation was only remotely related to the impugned proceedings as one of the possible consequences of a finding that there had been an abuse of the right of application (see, mutatis mutandis, Marušić v. Croatia (dec.), no. 79821/12, §§ 76-77, 23 May 2017).
• EGMR, 21.12.1999 - 26602/95

  W.R. v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.01.2024 - 56064/16

  Rn. 40 The Court notes that the right to practise as a lawyer is a "civil right" within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, W.R. v. Austria, no. 26602/95, § 27, 21 December 1999, and Angerjärv and Greinoman, cited above, § 97).
• EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 58751/00

  SCHREIBER et BOETSCH contre la FRANCE
• EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 31259/04

  KORTESSI c. GRECE
• EGMR, 20.10.2010 - 43569/08

  TOYAKSI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 10656/05

  [FRE]
• EKMR, 02.09.1996 - 25308/94

  VERITER contre la FRANCE

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 05.05.2026 - 30989/20

  GEROVSKA-POPCHEVSKA v. NORTH MACEDONIA

  56064/16, 58000/16 and 15087/17, § 44, 9 January 2024, and Marušić v. Croatia (dec.), no. 79821/12, §§ 76 and 77, 23 May 2017; and compare, for example, in the context of Article 8, 0vcharenko and Kolos v. Ukraine, nos.
• EGMR, 12.05.2026 - 37954/21

  SKRCHESKI v. NORTH MACEDONIA

  56064/16, 58000/16 and 15087/17, § 44, 9 January 2024, and Marušić v. Croatia (dec.), no. 79821/12, §§ 76 and 77, 23 May 2017; and compare, for example, in the context of Article 8, 0vcharenko and Kolos v. Ukraine, nos.
• EGMR, 20.05.2025 - 12756/22

  LAMAJ v. ALBANIA

  56064/16, 58000/16 and 15087/17, §§ 31-35, 9 September 2024).
• EGMR, 25.02.2025 - 22266/22

  ZURABIANI v. GEORGIA

  56064/16, 58000/16 and 15087/17, § 49, 9 September 2024, and Gestur Jónsson and Ragnar Halldór Hall, cited above, § 94).