Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 18.01.2017 - 12036/05, 29752/05, 33882/05, 35842/05, 5592/05 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SICA ET 4 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA ROUMANIE
Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises permettant d'éviter de nouvelles violations. Versement des sommes prévues dans l'arrêt (französisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SICA AND 4 OTHER CASES AGAINST ROMANIA
Information given by the government concerning measures taken to prevent new violations. Payment of the sums provided for in the judgment (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 09.07.2013 - 12036/05
- EGMR, 18.01.2017 - 12036/05, 29752/05, 33882/05, 35842/05, 5592/05
Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 33882/05 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SANDRU v. ROMANIA
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d MRK
Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review) Violation of Article 6+6-3-d - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial Criminal ...
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Sandru v. Romania
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (4) Neu Zitiert selbst (7)
- EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95
WLOCH v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 33882/05
Proceedings related to review or extension of pre-trial detention must be adversarial and must always ensure "equality of arms" between the parties, the prosecutor and the detained person (see Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II, and Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, § 126, ECHR 2000-XI). - EGMR, 17.07.2001 - 29900/96
SADAK AND OTHERS v. TURKEY (No. 1)
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 33882/05
29900/96, 29901/96, 29902/96 and 29903/96, § 67, ECHR 2001-VIII). - EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 17977/91
KAMPANIS v. GREECE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 33882/05
Although such a review does not always have to afford the same guarantees as those provided for in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, a person deprived of liberty under Article 5 § 1 (c) must be heard either in person or, where necessary, through some form of representation (see Kampanis v. Greece, 13 July 1995, § 47, Series A no. 318-B, and Tarau v. Romania, no. 3584/02, § 58, 24 February 2009).
- EGMR, 26.04.1991 - 12398/86
ASCH v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 33882/05
The Court will examine the complaint under the provisions of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) taken together (see, amongst other authorities, Asch v. Austria, 26 April 1991, § 25, Series A no. 203, and S.N. v. Sweden, no. 34209/96, § 43, ECHR 2002-V). - EGMR, 15.12.2011 - 26766/05
Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Zeugen (Recht auf ein faires Verfahren: …
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 33882/05
In particular, when a conviction is based solely or to a decisive degree on statements made by a person whom the accused has had no opportunity to examine or have examined, whether during the investigation or at the trial, the rights of the defence are restricted to an extent that is incompatible with the guarantees provided by Article 6 (see Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, § 119, ECHR 2011). - EGMR, 24.02.2009 - 3584/02
TARAU c. ROUMANIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 33882/05
Although such a review does not always have to afford the same guarantees as those provided for in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, a person deprived of liberty under Article 5 § 1 (c) must be heard either in person or, where necessary, through some form of representation (see Kampanis v. Greece, 13 July 1995, § 47, Series A no. 318-B, and Tarau v. Romania, no. 3584/02, § 58, 24 February 2009). - EGMR, 14.06.2005 - 69116/01
MAYALI c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 33882/05
This rule must also be interpreted with a certain flexibility; provided that the authorities cannot be accused of a lack of diligence in their efforts to award the defendant an opportunity to examine the witnesses in question, the witnesses" unavailability as such does not make it necessary to discontinue the prosecution (see Mayali v. France, no. 69116/01, § 32, 14 June 2005, and Ž.
- EGMR, 15.12.2015 - 9154/10
Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Zeugen (Al-Khawaja-Test; Recht auf ein …
Dezember 2012, Yevgeniy Ivanov./. Russland, Nr. 27100/03, Rdnrn. 45-50, 25. April 2013, und Sandru./. Rumänien, Nr. 33882/05, Rdnrn. 62-70, 15 Oktober 2013). - EGMR, 15.06.2021 - 13610/12
VARDAN MARTIROSYAN v. ARMENIA
The proceedings must be adversarial and must always ensure "equality of arms" between the parties, the prosecutor and the detained person (see, among other authorities, Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II, and ?žandru v. Romania, no. 33882/05, § 46, 15 October 2013). - EGMR, 22.10.2020 - 50423/08
GHAVALYAN v. ARMENIA
The proceedings must be adversarial and must always ensure "equality of arms" between the parties, the prosecutor and the detained person (see, among other authorities, Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II, and Sandru v. Romania, no. 33882/05, § 46, 15 October 2013). - EGMR, 29.03.2016 - 7459/04
GÖKBULUT c. TURQUIE
Il peut donc être approprié, dans une affaire donnée, d'examiner ces critères dans un ordre différent, notamment lorsque l'un d'eux se révèle particulièrement probant pour déterminer si la procédure a été ou non équitable (voir à cet égard, par exemple, Nechto c. Russie, no 24893/05, §§ 119-125 et 126-127, 24 janvier 2012, Mitkus c. Lettonie, no 7259/03, §§ 101-102 et 106, 2 octobre 2012, Gani c. Espagne, no 61800/08, §§ 43-45, 19 février 2013, et Sandru c. Roumanie, no 33882/05, §§ 62-66, 15 octobre 2013 ; dans toutes ces affaires, la deuxième étape, c'est-à-dire la question de savoir si les déclarations du témoin absent constituaient l'élément à charge unique ou déterminant, a été examinée avant la première étape, c'est-à-dire la question de l'existence d'un motif sérieux justifiant la non-comparution du témoin).