Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KINDLHOFER v. AUSTRIA

  Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione personae;No violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 - Right of appeal in criminal matters (Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 - National law;Minor offences;Review of sentence) ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  KINDLHOFER v. AUSTRIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 2 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Zitiert selbst (6)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 08.04.2010 - 38789/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.10.2021 - 20962/15

  His conviction by the Regional Administrative Court had not concerned an offence of a minor character as, according to the Court's case-law, an offence punishable by imprisonment of up to fourteen days was not considered one of a minor character (see Zaicevs, cited above; Galstyan v. Armenia, no. 26986/03, 15 November 2007; and Gurepka v. Ukraine (no. 2), no. 38789/04, 8 April 2010).

  The decisive element is the potential sanction in the abstract rather than the actual sanction imposed, as in the case of Gurepka no. 2 (no. 38789/04, §§ 12 and 33, 8 April 2010).

• EGMR, 04.12.2015 - 47143/06

  EGMR verurteilt Russland wegen geheimer Telefonüberwachung

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.10.2021 - 20962/15

  This is indispensable for putting the protection mechanism of the Convention into motion, although this criterion is not to be applied in a rigid, mechanical and inflexible way throughout the proceedings (see Roman Zakharov v. Russia [GC], no. 47143/06, § 164, ECHR 2015, with further references).
• EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.10.2021 - 20962/15

  Indeed, according to its established case-law, Article 6 § 1 of the Convention applies, under its criminal head, to administrative offences like the one at issue in the present case and the corresponding administrative criminal proceedings under Austrian law (see, Gradinger v Austria, 23 October 1995, § 36, Series A no. 328-C, and Baischer v. Austria, no. 2381/96, § 22, 20 December 2001).

• EGMR, 30.10.2014 - 17888/12

  SHVYDKA v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.10.2021 - 20962/15

  I share the opinion of the Court expressed in the case of Shvydka v. Ukraine (no. 17888/12, § 50, 30 October 2014), in which it held that where the right to a review under Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 exists, it should be effective in the same way as the right of access to a court enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, given the prominent place held in a democratic society by the right to a fair trial.
• EGMR, 30.06.2020 - 50514/13

  SAQUETTI IGLESIAS c. ESPAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.10.2021 - 20962/15

  In making this assessment, the Court has to take into account the specific circumstances of the case before it (see Saquetti Iglesias v. Spain, no. 50514/13, §§ 36 in fine and 44, 30 June 2020, where it found that a very serious financial penalty imposed for a customs offence, without any assessment of its proportionality, could also preclude an offence being considered minor within the meaning of that provision).
• EGMR, 01.10.2009 - 8682/02

  STANCHEV c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.10.2021 - 20962/15

  The Court has repeatedly found that if the law prescribes a custodial sentence as the main punishment, an offence cannot be described as "minor" within the meaning of Article 2 § 2 (see Zaicevs, cited above, § 55; Galstyan, cited above, § 124; Stanchev v. Bulgaria, no. 8682/02, § 48, 1 October 2009; and Gurepka (no. 2), cited above, § 33).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 24.09.2024 - 44715/20

  A.L. und E.J. ./. Frankreich - Encrochat-Menschenrechtsbeschwerde unzulässig …

  Cette condition est nécessaire pour que soit enclenché le mécanisme de protection prévu par la Convention, même si ce critère ne doit pas s'appliquer de façon rigide, mécanique et inflexible tout au long de la procédure (Centre de ressources juridiques au nom de Valentin Câmpeanu c. Roumanie [GC], no 47848/08, § 96, CEDH 2014, et Kindlhofer c. Autriche, no 20962/15, § 26, 26 octobre 2021).
• EGMR, 09.12.2025 - 13810/22

  KUCERA v. AUSTRIA

  Indeed, according to its established case-law, Article 6 § 1 of the Convention applies, under its criminal head, to administrative offences like the one at issue in the present case and the corresponding administrative criminal proceedings under Austrian law (see Gradinger v. Austria, 23 October 1995, § 36, Series A no. 328-C, and Baischer v. Austria, no. 32381/96, § 22, 20 December 2001; compare also with Kindlhofer v. Austria, no. 20962/15, § 30, 26 October 2021, albeit in the context of Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention).
• EGMR, 21.01.2025 - 19085/18

  ÇAGIL v. TURKEY

  In the Court's view, imprisonment for failure to pay a fine appears to be a remote consequence of a directly applied judicial fine, and in any event it did not happen in the present case because the applicant had paid the fines imposed on him (see Kindlhofer v. Austria, no. 20962/15, §§ 42-43, 26 January 2022).