Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BAUCAL-DORDEVIC AND DORDEVIC v. SERBIA

  Art. 6, Art. 13, Art. 35 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Zitiert selbst (4)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 18.01.2005 - 74153/01

  POPOV v. MOLDOVA (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.07.2013 - 38540/07

  Moreover, it cannot be excluded that a breach of the confidentiality principle could, in certain circumstances, justify the conclusion that an application is inadmissible on the ground of an abuse of the right of petition (see, inter alia, Hadrabová v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 42165/02, 25 September 2007; Popov v. Moldova, (no. 1), no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; and Benjocki and Others v. Serbia (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 25.09.2007 - 42165/02

  HADRABOVA v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.07.2013 - 38540/07

  Moreover, it cannot be excluded that a breach of the confidentiality principle could, in certain circumstances, justify the conclusion that an application is inadmissible on the ground of an abuse of the right of petition (see, inter alia, Hadrabová v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 42165/02, 25 September 2007; Popov v. Moldova, (no. 1), no. 74153/01, § 48, 18 January 2005; and Benjocki and Others v. Serbia (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 15.12.2009 - 5958/07

  BENJOCKI v. SERBIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.07.2013 - 38540/07

  5958/07, 6561/07, 8093/07 and 9162/07, 15 December 2009).
• EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 16098/05

  DI SALVO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.07.2013 - 38540/07

  The Government further submitted that the applicants had used offensive language in their submission of 31 December 2010 and in that respect referred to the Court's decision in the Di Salvo case (see Di Salvo v. Italy (dec.), no. 16098/05, 11 January 2007).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 18496/16

  ESKERKHANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  5958/07, 6561/07, 8093/07 and 9162/07, 15 December 2009; Baucal-Đorđević and Đorđević v. Serbia (dec.), no. 38540/07, 2 July 2013; Gorgadze v. Georgia (dec.), no. 57990/10, 2 September 2014; and Ausad Valimised Mtü v. Estonia (dec.), no. 40631/14, 27 September 2016).

  5958/07, 6561/07, 8093/07 and 9162/07, 15 December 2009; Baucal-Đorđević and Đorđević v. Serbia (dec.), no. 38540/07, 2 July 2013; Gorgadze v. Georgia (dec.), no. 57990/10, 2 September 2014; and Ausad Valimised Mtü v. Estonia (dec.), no. 40631/14, 27 September 2016; it also refers to Tsonev v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 44885/10, § 26, 8 December 2015.

• EGMR, 27.09.2016 - 40631/14

  AUSAD VALIMISED MTU v. ESTONIA

  The Court has on many occasions rejected applications as abusive where the applicants or their representatives had intentionally disclosed to the public information about friendly-settlement negotiations (see, among others, Benjocki (dec.), cited above; Barreau and Others (dec.), cited above; Abbasov and Others (dec.), cited above; Baucal-Đorđević and Đorđević v. Serbia (dec.), no. 38540/07, 2 July 2013; Gorgadze (dec.), cited above; and Tsonev (dec.), cited above).
• EGMR, 23.11.2023 - 29836/19

  KHMALADZE v. GEORGIA

  5958/07, 6561/07, 8093/07 and 9162/07, 15 December 2009; Baucal-Đorđević and Đorđević v. Serbia (dec.), no. 38540/07, 2 July 2013; Abbasov and Others, § 29, Gorgadze, §§ 19 and 21, Tsonev, § 26, all cited above; Ausad Valimised Mtü v. Estonia (dec.), no. 40631/14, 27 September 2016; and Y and others v. Bulgaria, no. 1666/19, § 25, 8 October 2020).

• EGMR, 17.02.2026 - 54323/22

  NÉMETH v. HUNGARY

  5958/07 and 3 others, 15 December 2009; Abbasov and Others, cited above, § 29, Baucal-Đorđević and Đorđević v. Serbia (dec.), no. 38540/07, § 28, 2 July 2013; and Gorgadze, cited above, § 19).
• EGMR, 01.04.2025 - 27166/21

  KALANDIA v. GEORGIA

  5958/07, 6561/07, 8093/07, and 9162/07, 15 December 2009; Baucal-Đorđević and Đorđević v. Serbia (dec.), no. 38540/07, 2 July 2013; Ausad Valimised Mtü v. Estonia (dec.), no. 40631/14, 27 September 2016; and Y and others v. Bulgaria, no. 1666/19, § 25, 8 October 2020; see also Abbasov and Others, § 29; Gorgadze, §§ 19 and 21; and Tsonev, § 26, all cited above).
• EGMR, 24.05.2018 - 16142/08

  BURLAKOV v. UKRAINE

  This rule is absolute and does not allow for an individual assessment of how much detail may be disclosed (Mirjana Baucal-Đorđević and Petar Đorđević against Serbia (dec.), no. 38540/07, § 27, 2 July 2013).