Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  G.K. v. POLAND

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 34, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 5-1 Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 5-4 No violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 8 Not necessary to examine Art. 34 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 08.12.1998 - 38816/97
• EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 38816/97
• EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

Wird zitiert von ... (10)Zitiert selbst (7)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Ableitung einer allgemeinen Verpflichtung zur Entlassung eines …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

  Continued detention can be justified in a given case only if there are specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty laid down in Article 5 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 110-111, ECHR 2000-X).

  The Court will assess the reasonableness of the length of the impugned proceedings in the light of the particular circumstances of the case and having regard to the criteria laid down in its case-law, in particular the complexity of the case and the conduct of the applicant and of the relevant authorities (see, among many other authorities, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 124, ECHR 2000-X).

• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

  Any "interference by a public authority" with the right to respect fro correspondence will contravene Article 8 of the Convention unless it is "in accordance with the law, pursues one or more of the legitimate aims referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article and is "necessary in a democratic society" in order to achieve them (see, among many other authorities, Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, p. 32, § 84; Campbell v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1992, Series A no. 233, p. 16, § 34 and Niedbała v. Poland no. 27915/95, § 78).
• EGMR, 25.03.1992 - 13590/88

  CAMPBELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

  Any "interference by a public authority" with the right to respect fro correspondence will contravene Article 8 of the Convention unless it is "in accordance with the law, pursues one or more of the legitimate aims referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article and is "necessary in a democratic society" in order to achieve them (see, among many other authorities, Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, p. 32, § 84; Campbell v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1992, Series A no. 233, p. 16, § 34 and Niedbała v. Poland no. 27915/95, § 78).

• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

  Although depending on the nature of detention those guarantees necessarily differ, in cases where it falls within the ambit of Article 5 § 1 (c), a hearing is required (see Ječius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 100, ECHR 2000-IX; and Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II, with further references).
• EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95

  WLOCH v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

  The prosecutor's submissions were put on the record of the session (see also Włoch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, judgment of 19 October 2000, §§ 69-73).
• EGMR, 21.12.2000 - 33492/96

  JABLONSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

  Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also be satisfied that the national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see, for instance, Jabłoński v. Poland, no. 33492/96, § 80, 21 December 2000).
• EGMR, 20.06.2000 - 33274/96

  FOXLEY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

  It does not consider it necessary to examine the same set of facts from the point of view of the alleged interference with the exercise of the applicant's right to an individual petition under Article 34 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Foxley v. the United Kingdom, no. 33274/96, § 47, 20 June 2000).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 26.05.2009 - 6773/02

  DAMIAN-BURUEANA ET DAMIAN c. ROUMANIE

  La Cour estime que les montants octroyés par les juridictions internes, bien qu'inférieurs à ceux que les requérants avaient demandés, ne semblent pas déraisonnables, eu égard aux circonstances et à la jurisprudence de la Cour en la matière (voir, parmi d'autres, Castravet c. Moldova, no 23393/05, 13 mars 2007, D.P. c. Pologne, no 34221/96, 20 janvier 2004, G.K. c. Pologne, no 38816/97, 20 janvier 2004, Beet et autres c. Royaume-Uni, nos 47676/99, 58923/00, 58927/00, 61373/00 et 61377/00, 1er mars 2005 et Asenov c. Bulgarie, no 42026/98, 15 juillet 2005) et ne permet pas de conclure que les tribunaux ont rendu le droit garanti par l'article 5 § 5 de la Convention « théorique ou illusoire'(Attard c. Malte (déc.), no 46750/99, 28 septembre 2000 et Stoianova et Nedelcu, précitée).
• EGMR, 18.01.2007 - 19611/04

  SUBINSKI v. SLOVENIA

  This may occur on a date prior to the case coming before the trial court, such as the date of arrest, the date when the person concerned was officially notified that he was to be prosecuted or the date when the preliminary investigations were opened (Neumeister v. Austria, judgment of 27 June 1968, Series A no. 8, p. 41, § 18; Foti and Others v. Italy, judgment of 10 December 1982, Series A no. 56, §§ 52-53; and G.K. v. Poland, no. 38816/97, § 98, 20 January 2004).
• EGMR, 02.11.2006 - 58971/00

  RADOSLAV POPOV v. BULGARIA

  Accordingly, the time-limit for submitting the related complaint to the Court expired six months after 4 May 1999 (see G.K. v. Poland (dec.), no. 38816/97, 8 December 1998; Baginski v. Poland (dec.), no. 37444/97, 21 January 2003; Oratowski v. Poland, (dec.), no. 40698/98, 6 February 2003; Al Akidi v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 35825/97, 19 September 2000; and Hristov v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 35436/97, 19 September 2000).

• EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 22398/05

  [FRE]

  La Cour rappelle que, pour satisfaire à l'exigence de régularité, une détention doit avoir lieu « selon les voies légales ", autrement dit elle doit être conforme aux normes de fond comme de procédure du droit interne (voir, parmi d'autres, Medvedyev et autres c. France [GC], no 3394/03, § 79, CEDH 2010, ou G.K. c. Pologne, no 38816/97, § 76, 20 janvier 2004).
• EGMR, 06.12.2005 - 20841/02

  DROZDOWSKI v. POLAND

  The prohibition laid down in Article 103 § 1 of the Code of Execution of Criminal Sentences was limited to the correspondence of convicted persons (see G.K. v. Poland, no. 38816/97, § 110, 20 January 2004).
• EGMR, 22.07.2008 - 26846/05

  CWIERTNIAK v. POLAND

  In respect of convicted persons Article 103 § 1 of the Code of Execution of Criminal Sentences provided a specific statutory prohibition on censorship of their correspondence with the European Court of Human Rights (see G.K. v. Poland, no. 38816/97, § 110, 20 January 2004, and Kwiek v. Poland, no. 51895/99, § 44, 30 May 2006).
• EGMR, 09.11.2000 - 25196/94

  IWÁNCZUK v. POLAND

  This was the point at which the applicant could benefit, had he wished, from a possibility to present his argument to the court within the context of adversarial procedure, and, consequently, the point at which the running of the six-month period in respect of the present complaint started for the purposes of Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, 38816/97, Dec.
• EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 34221/96

  D.P. v. POLAND

  The proceedings in the application were conducted simultaneously with the application no. 38816/97.
• EGMR, 14.12.2010 - 31888/06

  [ENG]

  Moreover, it is not a remedy whereby an arrested or detained person can challenge the legal or factual grounds for arrest or detention (see G.K. v. Poland (dec.), no. 38816/97, 12 November 2002).
• EGMR, 12.01.2010 - 69122/01

  [ENG]

  Moreover, it is not a remedy whereby an arrested or detained person can challenge the legal or factual grounds for arrest or detention (see G.K. v. Poland (dec.), no. 38816/97, 12 November 2002).

Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  G.K. v. POLAND

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
  Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 08.12.1998 - 38816/97
• EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 38816/97
• EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (1)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 28.10.1998 - 19601/92

  ÇIRAKLAR v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.1998 - 38816/97

  12.2.92, D.R. 72, p. 148; No. 19601/92, Dec.

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen

Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  G.K. v. POLAND

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 34 MRK
  Admissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 08.12.1998 - 38816/97
• EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 38816/97
• EGMR, 20.01.2004 - 38816/97

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (2)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95

  WLOCH v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 38816/97

  The prosecutor's submissions were put on the record of the session (see also Włoch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, judgment of 19 October 2000, §§ 69-73).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 27748/95

  ZDEBSKI, ZDEBSKA AND ZDEBSKA v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 38816/97

  He cited a number of examples from the Convention institutions' case-law and in particular referred to the Commission's decision on admissibility of the case of Baranowski v. Poland (no. 28358/95, dec. 8.12.1997, unpublished) and the Court's ruling in the case of Zdebski, Zdebska and Zdebska v. Poland (no. 27748/95, dec. 6 April 2000, unreported).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen