Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KARCZYNSKI v. POLAND

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Zitiert selbst (4)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 17.11.2015 - 60879/12

  RUPP v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 18460/15

  60879/12 and 60892/12, § 63, 17 November 2015).
• EGMR, 12.07.2013 - 25424/09

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 18460/15

  Viewed as a procedural guarantee in the context of a criminal trial itself, the presumption of innocence imposes requirements in respect of, inter alia, the burden of proof, legal presumptions of fact and law, the privilege against self-incrimination; pre-trial publicity and premature expressions, by the trial court or by other public officials, of a defendant's guilt (see Allen v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 25424/09, § 93, ECHR 2013).
• EGMR, 19.05.2009 - 2815/05

  ANTONICELLI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 18460/15

  Moreover, while Article 6 of the Convention guarantees the right to a fair hearing, it does not lay down any rules on the admissibility of evidence or the way it should be assessed, which are therefore primarily matters for regulation by national law and the national courts (see, among many other authorities, García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I, with further references, and Antonicelli v. Poland, no. 2815/05, § 48, 19 May 2009).
• EGMR, 08.07.2004 - 4248/02

  REEVES v. NORWAY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 18460/15

  In all cases, and no matter what the approach applied, the language used by the decision maker will be of critical importance in assessing the compatibility of the decision and its reasoning with Article 6 § 2 (see Cleve v. Germany, no. 48144/09, § 54, 15 January 2015; Allen, cited above, § 126; and Reeves v. Norway (dec.), no. 4248/02, 8 July 2004).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 11.06.2024 - 32483/19

  NEALON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM and 1 other application

  Those principles were based on a thorough analysis of the Court's jurisprudence, and had been repeated in several cases (see, for example, Vella v. Malta, no. 69122/10, 11 February 2014; Müller, cited above; Karczyński v. Poland (dec.), no. 18460/15, 23 May 2017; Bikas, cited above; Fleischner, cited above; Farzaliyev, cited above; Pasquini v. San Marino (no. 2), no. 23349/17, 20 October 2020; Milachikj v. North Macedonia, no. 44773/16, 14 October 2021 and Diamantopoulos v. Greece (dec.), no. 68144/13, 8 March 2022).