Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 12.11.2013 - 31876/11 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2013,53760) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SHIRINOVA v. AZERBAIJAN
Art. 13, Art. 35, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 3 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 21.11.2002 - 36747/02
ARSLAN contre la TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.11.2013 - 31876/11
In the absence of any explanation for an interval of more than one day between the date on which the first communication was written and the date on which it was posted (that is, the date of the postmark recording the date on which the application was sent to the Court), the latter is to be regarded as the date of introduction of an application (see Arslan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 36747/02, ECHR 2002-X; Ruzicková v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 15630/05, 16 September 2008; and Kemevuako v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 65938/09, 1 June 2010). - EGMR, 16.09.2008 - 15630/05
RUZICKOVÁ c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.11.2013 - 31876/11
In the absence of any explanation for an interval of more than one day between the date on which the first communication was written and the date on which it was posted (that is, the date of the postmark recording the date on which the application was sent to the Court), the latter is to be regarded as the date of introduction of an application (see Arslan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 36747/02, ECHR 2002-X; Ruzicková v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 15630/05, 16 September 2008; and Kemevuako v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 65938/09, 1 June 2010). - EGMR, 01.06.2010 - 65938/09
KEMEVUAKO v. THE NETHERLANDS
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.11.2013 - 31876/11
In the absence of any explanation for an interval of more than one day between the date on which the first communication was written and the date on which it was posted (that is, the date of the postmark recording the date on which the application was sent to the Court), the latter is to be regarded as the date of introduction of an application (see Arslan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 36747/02, ECHR 2002-X; Ruzicková v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 15630/05, 16 September 2008; and Kemevuako v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 65938/09, 1 June 2010).