Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ZIAJA v. POLAND

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ZIAJA v. POLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Zitiert selbst (9)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 25.11.2003 - 41431/98

  WIERCISZEWSKA v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  Moreover, this deficiency is imputable to the authorities and not the applicants (see, among many others, Wierciszewska v. Poland, no. 41431/98, § 46, 25 November 2003; Matica v. Romania, no. 19567/02, § 24, 2 November 2006; and Vlad and Others v. Romania, nos.
• EGMR, 10.05.2007 - 56026/00

  WENDE AND KUKOWKA v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  The Court has already found that declaring a complaint inadmissible on the grounds that an applicant "had not specified the circumstances on which his/her complaint had been based" is too formalistic an approach, which may prevent an applicant's claims from being examined on the merits (see Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, §§ 49-57, 10 May 2007).
• EGMR, 02.11.2006 - 19567/02

  MATICA v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  Moreover, this deficiency is imputable to the authorities and not the applicants (see, among many others, Wierciszewska v. Poland, no. 41431/98, § 46, 25 November 2003; Matica v. Romania, no. 19567/02, § 24, 2 November 2006; and Vlad and Others v. Romania, nos.

• EGMR, 07.11.2006 - 15072/02

  LUKJANIUK v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  In this connection, the Court would reiterate that experts work in the context of judicial proceedings under the supervision of a judge, who remains responsible for the preparation and speedy conduct of proceedings (see, for instance, Proszak v. Poland, 16 December 1997, § 44, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VIII, and Łukjaniuk v. Poland, no. 15072/02, § 28, 7 November 2006).
• EGMR - 50806/07

  [FRE]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  40756/06, 41508/07 and 50806/07, § 133, 6 November 2013).
• EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 5208/03

  ANTONIC-TOMASOVIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  In these circumstances, to ask the applicant to lodge a third complaint under the 2004 Act would be to overstretch her duties under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see, for example, Antonić-Tomasović v. Croatia, no. 5208/03, §§ 25-34, 10 November 2005).
• EGMR, 07.07.2015 - 72287/10

  RUTKOWSKI AND OTHERS v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  A detailed description of the relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for excessive length of judicial proceedings - in particular the applicable provisions of the 2004 Act - are presented in the Court's decisions in the cases of Charzyński v. Poland ((dec.), no. 15212/03, §§ 12-23, ECHR 2005-V), Ratajczyk v. Poland ((dec.), no. 11215/02, ECHR 2005-VIII), and in its judgments in the cases of Krasuski v. Poland (no. 61444/00, §§ 34-46, ECHR 2005-V) and, most recently, Rutkowski and Others v. Poland (nos. 72287/10, 13927/11 and 46187/11, §§ 75-107, 7 July 2015).
• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 15212/03

  CHARZYNSKI c. POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  A detailed description of the relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for excessive length of judicial proceedings - in particular the applicable provisions of the 2004 Act - are presented in the Court's decisions in the cases of Charzyński v. Poland ((dec.), no. 15212/03, §§ 12-23, ECHR 2005-V), Ratajczyk v. Poland ((dec.), no. 11215/02, ECHR 2005-VIII), and in its judgments in the cases of Krasuski v. Poland (no. 61444/00, §§ 34-46, ECHR 2005-V) and, most recently, Rutkowski and Others v. Poland (nos. 72287/10, 13927/11 and 46187/11, §§ 75-107, 7 July 2015).
• BFH, 24.02.2006 - III S 7/06

  Voraussetzungen für die Eröffnung einer Gegenvorstellung

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.05.2019 - 45751/10

  By a decision of 5 April 2006 (file no. III S 7/06) the Gliwice Regional Court dismissed the claim.

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 11.03.2021 - 15016/07

  SCHRADE v. GEORGIA

  In cases in which the cooperation and/or engagement of experts proves necessary, it is the responsibility of the domestic courts to ensure that the proceedings are not excessively prolonged (see Johanna Fröhlich, cited above, § 42 with further references therein; see also Stojanov v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 34215/02, § 60, 31 May 2007, and Ziaja v. Poland (dec.) [Committee], no. 45751/10, § 44, 16 May 2019)).
• EGMR, 04.06.2020 - 63696/12

  JARMUZ AGAINST POLAND AND 2 OTHER CASES

  45751/10.