Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  WRONA v. POLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings Article 6-1 - Reasonable time) (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Zitiert selbst (8)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Ableitung einer allgemeinen Verpflichtung zur Entlassung eines …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 29345/09

  The Court recalls that the general principles regarding the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention were stated in a number of its previous judgments (see, among many other authorities, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110 et seq, ECHR 2000-XI; and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, §§ 41-44, ECHR 2006-..., with further references).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 29345/09

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 15212/03

  CHARZYNSKI c. POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 29345/09

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for the excessive length of judicial proceedings, in particular the applicable provisions of the 2004 Act, are set out in the Court's decisions in the cases of Charzynski v. Poland (dec.), no. 15212/03, §§ 12-23, ECHR 2005-V and Ratajczyk v. Poland (dec.), no. 11215/02, ECHR 2005-VIII; and its judgments in the cases of Krasuski v. Poland, no. 61444/00, §§ 34-46, ECHR 2005-V and Krzysztofiak v. Poland, no. 38018/07, §§ 23-30, 20 April 2010.

• EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 17584/04

  CELEJEWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 29345/09

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the imposition of pre-trial detention (tymczasowe aresztowanie), the grounds for its extension, release from detention and rules governing other, so-called "preventive measures" (srodki zapobiegawcze) are stated in the Court's judgments in the cases of Golek v. Poland, no. 31330/02, §§ 27-33, 25 April 2006; and Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, §§ 22-23, 4 May 2006.
• EGMR, 16.01.2007 - 7870/04

  BAK v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 29345/09

  In the Court's view, the fact that the case concerned a member of such a criminal group should be taken into account in assessing compliance with Article 5 § 3 (see Bak v. Poland, no. 7870/04, § 57, 16 January 2007).
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 28904/02

  GORSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 29345/09

  The Court reiterates that the existence of a general risk flowing from the organised nature of the alleged criminal activities of the applicant may be accepted as the basis for his detention at the initial stages of the proceedings (see Górski v. Poland, no. 28904/02, § 58, 4 October 2005) and in some circumstances also for subsequent prolongations of the detention (see Celejewski, cited above, § 37).
• EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 38018/07

  KRZYSZTOFIAK v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 29345/09

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for the excessive length of judicial proceedings, in particular the applicable provisions of the 2004 Act, are set out in the Court's decisions in the cases of Charzynski v. Poland (dec.), no. 15212/03, §§ 12-23, ECHR 2005-V and Ratajczyk v. Poland (dec.), no. 11215/02, ECHR 2005-VIII; and its judgments in the cases of Krasuski v. Poland, no. 61444/00, §§ 34-46, ECHR 2005-V and Krzysztofiak v. Poland, no. 38018/07, §§ 23-30, 20 April 2010.
• EGMR, 18.12.2007 - 13167/02

  RYDZ v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 29345/09

  However, in the present case the Government have not pleaded the applicant's failure to exhaust domestic remedies on this ground and it is not for the Court to consider this matter of its own motion (see, mutatis mutandis, Mooren v. Germany [GC], no. 11364/03, §§ 57-59, 9 July 2009 and Rydz v. Poland, no. 13167/02, § 72, 18 December 2007).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 07.12.2017 - 28836/04

  ABRAMCZYK AGAINST POLAND AND 102 OTHER CASES

  29345/09.
• EGMR, 21.04.2020 - 28085/16

  ANDRUSZKIEWICZ AND FLUDERSKI v. POLAND

  Also, the need to obtain voluminous evidence and to determine the degree of the alleged responsibility of each of the defendants, who had allegedly acted as a criminal group and against whom numerous charges of serious offences were laid, constituted valid grounds for the applicants' initial detention (see, mutatis mutandis, Mierzejewski v. Poland, no. 15612/13, § 38, 24 February 2015, Rambiert v. Poland, no. 34322/10, § 31, 10 March 2015; and Wrona v. Poland, no. 29345/09, § 35, 10 March 2015).