Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 29.09.2005 - 42986/02 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
T. DALSGAARD AND J. DALSGAARD v. DENMARK
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94
Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.09.2005 - 42986/02
As to the question whether the applicants have exhausted domestic remedies, the Court recalls that the purpose of Article 35 § 1, which sets out the rule on exhaustion of domestic remedies, is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see e.g. Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V). - EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94
PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.09.2005 - 42986/02
According to the Court's case-law, the reasonableness of the length of the proceedings must be assessed in the light of the particular circumstances of the case and having regard to the criteria laid down in the Court's case-law, in particular the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and that of the authorities before which the case was brought (cf. Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC] no.25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II). - EGMR, 18.09.2001 - 49716/99
DELANGHE contre la BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.09.2005 - 42986/02
Thus, even assuming that the applicants" request for leave to appeal against the High Court's judgment related specifically to the length-of-the-proceedings-issue and that such a request may be considered an effective remedy (see, among others, Delanghe v. Belgium (dec.), no. 49716/99, 18 September 2001, and mutatis mutandis, Ohlen v. Denmark (striking out), no. 63214/00, 24 February 2005 and Graaskov Jensen v. Denmark (dec.), no. 48470/99, ECHR 2001-X), the applicants have already made use of it. - EGMR, 14.02.2002 - 48470/99
JENSEN v. DENMARK
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.09.2005 - 42986/02
Thus, even assuming that the applicants" request for leave to appeal against the High Court's judgment related specifically to the length-of-the-proceedings-issue and that such a request may be considered an effective remedy (see, among others, Delanghe v. Belgium (dec.), no. 49716/99, 18 September 2001, and mutatis mutandis, Ohlen v. Denmark (striking out), no. 63214/00, 24 February 2005 and Graaskov Jensen v. Denmark (dec.), no. 48470/99, ECHR 2001-X), the applicants have already made use of it.
- EGMR, 26.06.2006 - 11968/04
UGILT HANSEN v. DENMARK
Moreover, in the present case the length of the proceedings was primarily caused by the various adjournments awaiting the outcome of the so-called test-cases whose outcome most likely would have had significant influence on the charges against the applicant, and maybe to the extent that they should have been acquitted (see also Tove Dalsgaard and Jens Dalsgaard v. Denmark (dec.), application no. 42986/02, 29 September 2005).Accordingly, had the applicant complied with the procedural rules for requesting leave to appeal against the High Court's judgment of 6 November 2003 and had the Leave-to-Appeal Board granted his request, the Supreme Court would have examined the length-of-proceedings complaint, and in case of a finding of a failure to observe the reasonable time requirement, it could have granted redress therefore by, for example, exempting the applicant from paying legal costs or reducing his sentence (see, among others, Delanghe v. Belgium (dec.), no. 49716/99, 18 September 2001, and mutatis mutandis, Ohlen v. Denmark (striking out), no. 63214/00, 24 February 2005, Graaskov Jensen v. Denmark (dec.), no. 48470/99, ECHR 2001-X, and Tove Dalsgaard and Jens Dalsgaard v. Denmark (dec.), no. 42986/02, 29 September 2005).