Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  UMEK v. SLOVENIA

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 35463/02

  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, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 35463/02

  The Court reiterates that Article 13 guarantees an effective remedy before a national authority for an alleged breach of the requirement under Article 6 § 1 to hear a case within a reasonable time (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 156, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 03.05.2007 - 26867/02

  GRZINCIC c. SLOVENIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 35463/02

  However, the Court found in the Grzincic judgment that the conditions laid down in that section had not been fulfilled in respect of applications concerning terminated proceedings which had been notified to the Slovenian Government before 1 January 2007, as in the present case (see Grzincic v. Slovenia, no. 26867/02, § 67, 3 May 2007).
• EGMR, 29.03.1989 - 11118/84

  BOCK v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 35463/02

  The Court acknowledges that the domestic courts were in the best position to judge whether the case ought to be referred back to the lower courts under the relevant provision of domestic law (Bock v. Germany, judgment of 29 March 1989, Series A no. 150, § 43).
• EGMR, 08.12.2016 - 23032/02

  LUKENDA AND 263 OTHER CASES AGAINST SLOVENIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 35463/02

  The Court notes that it has already found that the remedies available prior to the entry into force of the 2006 Act, including a claim for damages under Article 26 of the Slovenian Constitution (see paragraph 24 above), cannot be considered effective (Lukenda v. Slovenia, no. 23032/02, ECHR 2005-X).

• EGMR, 08.11.2012 - 21308/06

  ZELE v. SLOVENIA

  Having regard to the above and its case-law on the subject (see, Jesic v. Slovenia, no. 38341/02, §§ 17-19, 27 April 2006; Bizjak Jagodic v. Slovenia, no. 42274/02, §§ 16-18, 6 April 2006, Rodic v. Slovenia, no. 38528/02, §§ 18-20, 27 April 2006 and Umek v. Slovenia, no. 35463/02, 8 January 2009, §§ 44-47) the Court considers that the length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the "reasonable time" requirement.