Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DORADO BAÚLDE v. SPAIN

  Inadmissible (englisch)

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

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 29731/96

  Dieter Krombach

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 23486/12

  Thus, the review by a higher court of a conviction or sentence may concern both points of fact and points of law or be confined solely to points of law (see Krombach v. France, no. 29731/96, § 96, ECHR 2001-II, and Shvydka v. Ukraine, no. 17888/12, § 49, 30 October 2014).
• EGMR, 18.09.2008 - 28034/04

  MULLER v. AUSTRIA (No. 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 23486/12

  In this regard, the Contracting States may limit the scope of the review by a higher tribunal by virtue of the reference in paragraph 1 of Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 to national law (see Müller v. Austria (no. 2), no. 28034/04, § 37, 18 September 2008).
• EGMR, 06.09.2005 - 61406/00

  GUREPKA v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 23486/12

  As regards the applicant's complaint under Article 13 in conjunction with Article 6 of the Convention, the Court recalls that neither Article 6 of the Convention nor Article 13 guarantees, as such, a right of appeal or a right to a second level of jurisdiction (see, mutatis mutandis, Nurhan Yilmaz v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 16741/04, § 21, 8 April 2008, and Gurepka v. Ukraine, no. 61406/00, § 51, 6 September 2005).

• EGMR, 18.01.2000 - 27618/95

  PESTI AND FRODL v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 23486/12

  27618/95 and 27619/95, ECHR 2000-I (extracts)).
• EGMR, 30.10.2014 - 17888/12

  SHVYDKA v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 23486/12

  Thus, the review by a higher court of a conviction or sentence may concern both points of fact and points of law or be confined solely to points of law (see Krombach v. France, no. 29731/96, § 96, ECHR 2001-II, and Shvydka v. Ukraine, no. 17888/12, § 49, 30 October 2014).
• EGMR, 08.04.2008 - 16741/04

  YILMAZ (2) v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 23486/12

  As regards the applicant's complaint under Article 13 in conjunction with Article 6 of the Convention, the Court recalls that neither Article 6 of the Convention nor Article 13 guarantees, as such, a right of appeal or a right to a second level of jurisdiction (see, mutatis mutandis, Nurhan Yilmaz v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 16741/04, § 21, 8 April 2008, and Gurepka v. Ukraine, no. 61406/00, § 51, 6 September 2005).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 26.04.2016 - 22574/08

  KASHLEV v. ESTONIA

  27618/95 and 27619/95, ECHR 2000-I (extracts); Kristjansson and Boasson v. Iceland (dec.), no. 24945/04, 10 April 2007; and Dorado Baúlde v. Spain (dec.), no. 23486/12, 1 September 2015).
• EGMR, 12.07.2016 - 33502/07

  MARINOVA v. BULGARIA and 3 other applications

  Article 13 of the Convention does not guarantee, as such, a right to a further level of jurisdiction (see Dorado Baúlde v. Spain (dec.), no. 23486/12, § 18, 1 September 2015).
• EGMR, 20.04.2021 - 56751/13

  ÉGLISE ORTHODOXE VIEILLE-CALENDARISTE DE BULGARIE ET AUTRES c. BULGARIE

  Article 13 of the Convention does not guarantee a right to a further level of jurisdiction (see Dorado Baúlde v. Spain (dec.), no. 23486/12, § 18, 1 September 2015, and Marinova and Others v. Bulgaria, nos.