Neue Kooperation: dejure.org × Doctrine bringen KI-Power für Aktenanalyse, Recherche und Texterstellung. Doctrine entdecken
×
Weitere Entscheidungen unten: EGMR, 14.09.2011 | EGMR, 04.11.2003

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2007,60645
EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99 (https://dejure.org/2007,60645)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 17.07.2007 - 48666/99 (https://dejure.org/2007,60645)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 17. Juli 2007 - 48666/99 (https://dejure.org/2007,60645)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2007,60645) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KUCERA v. SLOVAKIA

    Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Preliminary objection dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) No violation of Art. 5-1 Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 5-4 Violation of Art. 8 (entry of the applicant's apartment by the police) Violation of Art. 8 (refusal to allow the applicant to ...

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (52)Zitiert selbst (7)

  • EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 17584/04

    CELEJEWSKI v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99
    Moreover, in cases concerning organised criminal groups, the risk that a detainee if released might bring pressure to bear on witnesses or other co-accused, or might otherwise obstruct the proceedings, is often particularly high (see Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, §§ 37-38, 4 May 2006).
  • EGMR, 10.08.2006 - 55389/00

    DOBREV v. BULGARIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99
    Having regard to its practice (see Dobrev v. Bulgaria, no. 55389/00, § 96, 10 August 2006; and Vejmola v. the Czech Republic, no. 57246/00, § 47, 25 October 2005, with further references), the Court considers the above periods to be in breach of the requirement of a speedy decision laid down in Article 5 § 4 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 03.04.2003 - 31583/96

    KLAMECKI v. POLAND (No. 2)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99
    In assessing whether an interference was "necessary" the Court will take into account the margin of appreciation left to the State authorities, but it is the duty of the respondent State to demonstrate the existence of the pressing social need behind the interference (see, among other authorities, Klamecki v. Poland (no. 2), no. 31583/96, § 144, 3 April 2003, with further references).
  • EGMR, 03.10.2006 - 543/03
    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99
    Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (for a recapitulation of the relevant case-law see, for example, McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, §§ 41-45, ECHR 2006-..., with further references).
  • EGMR, 28.09.1999 - 28114/95
    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99
    It therefore cannot suffice to deprive the applicant of his status as a "victim" within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention (see Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 44, ECHR 1999-VI; and, mutatis mutandis, YaÄŸcı and Sargın v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, § 44).
  • EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90

    YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99
    It therefore cannot suffice to deprive the applicant of his status as a "victim" within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention (see Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 44, ECHR 1999-VI; and, mutatis mutandis, YaÄŸcı and Sargın v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, § 44).
  • EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 47804/99

    HAVALA v. SLOVAKIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 48666/99
    Under the domestic courts' practice, the State Liability Act 1969 did not allow for compensation for non-pecuniary damage unless it was related to a deterioration in a person's health (for further details see Havala v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 47804/99, 13 September 2001).
  • EGMR, 09.10.2008 - 62936/00

    MOISEYEV v. RUSSIA

    Nevertheless, any restriction of that kind must be applied "in accordance with the law", must pursue one or more of the legitimate aims listed in paragraph 2 and, in addition, must be justified as being "necessary in a democratic society" (see, among other authorities, Estrikh v. Latvia, no. 73819/01, § 166, 18 January 2007; Kucera v. Slovakia, no. 48666/99, § 127, ECHR 2007-... (extracts); and Klamecki v. Poland (no. 2), no. 31583/96, § 144, 3 April 2003).
  • EGMR, 30.06.2015 - 41418/04

    [ENG]

    Pour déterminer si une ingérence est « nécessaire, dans une société démocratique ", la Cour tient compte de la marge d'appréciation laissée aux autorités nationales, mais l'État défendeur reste tenu de démontrer l'existence d'un besoin social impérieux sous-jacent à l'ingérence (Kučera c. Slovaquie, no 48666/99, § 127, 17 juillet 2007 ; et Klamecki c. Pologne (no 2), no 31583/96, § 144, 3 avril 2003).
  • EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 57541/09

    [ENG]

    The existence of a general risk flowing from it may be accepted as the basis for detention at the initial stages of the proceedings (see Kucera v. Slovakia, no. 48666/99, § 95, 17 July 2007, and Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, §§ 37 and 38, 4 May 2006).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
dejure.org Übersicht EGMR

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 48666/99, 14893/02   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2011,89788
EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 48666/99, 14893/02 (https://dejure.org/2011,89788)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 14.09.2011 - 48666/99, 14893/02 (https://dejure.org/2011,89788)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 14. September 2011 - 48666/99, 14893/02 (https://dejure.org/2011,89788)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,89788) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    AFFAIRES KUCERA ET HARIS CONTRE LA REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUE

    Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises pour l'exécution de l'engagement auquel a été subordonnée la solution de l'affaire (französisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KUCERA AND HARIS AGAINST THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC

    Information given by the government concerning measures taken for the execution of the undertakings attached to the solution of the case (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ...Zitiert selbst (4)

  • EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 14893/02

    HARIS v. SLOVAKIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 48666/99
    Application No. 14893/02, judgment of 6 September 2007, final on 6 December 2007).
  • EGMR, 10.05.2007 - 199/05

    JOHN c. GRECE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 48666/99
    Prolonged detention requires further, significant reasons for detention and the authorities must proceed with special diligence when dealing with detention issues (see inter alia, III. US 295/05, IV. US 253/05, III. US 199/05).
  • RG, 21.03.1907 - I 216/07

    Kann das Revisionsgericht in einem Falle, in dem der Beschwerdeführer sein …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 48666/99
    There is case-law of the Constitutional Court from 2003 onwards finding that domestic courts to have violated rights under the Convention and Constitution, on account of their failure to deal promptly with requests for release from detention (see inter alia, IV US 216/07 of 17/06/2008).
  • RG, 15.01.1908 - I 181/07

    Handlungsgehilfe; Verbot des Wettbewerbes

    Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 48666/99
    There is case-law of the Constitutional Court from 2005 onward finding domestic courts to have failed to provide relevant and sufficient reasons for continued detention, ordering the release of the persons concerned and awarding them financial compensation (see inter alia, IV US 181/07 of 10/01/2008).
  • EGMR, 28.01.2010 - 30122/03

    SIMEONOV c. BULGARIE

    Pour qu'une telle ingérence soit compatible avec l'article 8 de la Convention, elle doit être « prévue par la loi ", poursuivre un ou plusieurs buts légitimes et être proportionnée au but légitime poursuivi (voir Kucera c. Slovaquie, no 48666/99, § 127, CEDH 2007-IX (extraits)).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
dejure.org Übersicht EGMR

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2003,47318
EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99 (https://dejure.org/2003,47318)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04.11.2003 - 48666/99 (https://dejure.org/2003,47318)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04. November 2003 - 48666/99 (https://dejure.org/2003,47318)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2003,47318) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (10)

  • EuGH, 04.05.1999 - C-108/97

    Windsurfing Chiemsee - Richtlinie 89/104/EWG - Marken - Geographische …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    In proceedings no. 4C 109/97 before the Šala District Court the plaintiff claimed compensation for non-pecuniary damage from the Ministry of Justice on the ground that he was acquitted following the re-opening of proceedings leading to his conviction of an offence.

    The Government submitted, with reference to the judgment of the Šala District Court delivered in proceedings no. 4C 109/97 on 29 October 1998 and to decision no. 8 Co 109/99 delivered by the Nitra Regional Court on 23 March 2000 (see "Relevant domestic law and practice" above), that the applicant could have obtained compensation for non-pecuniary damage and thus appropriate redress under that Act.

  • RG, 02.03.1899 - 109/99

    1. Hat der Angehörige (§ 51 St.P.O.) eines Verurteilten in dem erst nach dieser …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    In decision no. 8 Co 109/99 of 23 March 2000 the Nitra Regional Court quashed the above Šala District Court's judgment.

    The Government submitted, with reference to the judgment of the Šala District Court delivered in proceedings no. 4C 109/97 on 29 October 1998 and to decision no. 8 Co 109/99 delivered by the Nitra Regional Court on 23 March 2000 (see "Relevant domestic law and practice" above), that the applicant could have obtained compensation for non-pecuniary damage and thus appropriate redress under that Act.

  • EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87
    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    Paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the Convention covers the former and paragraph 5 of Article 5 the latter (see Yağcı and Sargin v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, § 44; Tomasi v. France, judgment of 28 July 1992, Series A no. 241-A, § 79 and Leperlier v. France, No. 13091/87, Commission decision of 1 October 1990, with further reference).
  • EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82
    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    According to the Court's case-law, Article 13 applies only where an individual has an "arguable claim" to be the victim of a violation of a Convention right (see the Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, § 52).
  • EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90

    YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    Paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the Convention covers the former and paragraph 5 of Article 5 the latter (see Yağcı and Sargin v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, § 44; Tomasi v. France, judgment of 28 July 1992, Series A no. 241-A, § 79 and Leperlier v. France, No. 13091/87, Commission decision of 1 October 1990, with further reference).
  • VG der Evangelischen Landeskirche in Württemberg, 29.11.2002 - 4/02
    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    In its findings no. I ÚS 13/00-85 and no. I. ÚS 4/02-51 delivered respectively on 10 July 2001 and on 9 July 2003 the Constitutional Court found a violation of the plaintiffs' constitutional right to respect for their home.
  • EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 47804/99

    HAVALA v. SLOVAKIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    Under the domestic courts' practice, the State Liability Act of 1969 does not allow for compensation for non-pecuniary damage unless it is related to deterioration of a person's health (for further details see Havala v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 47804/99, 13 September 2001, unreported).
  • EGMR, 22.06.2004 - 50213/99

    TAM v. SLOVAKIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    It noted, in particular, that compensation for damage of a non-pecuniary nature is excluded except in cases where damage to a person's health was caused (see Tám v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 50213/99, 1 July 2003 with further references).
  • EGMR, 17.06.2003 - 54996/00

    CHOVANCIK v. SLOVAKIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    The Court notes in this context that at the relevant time a petition to the Constitutional Court was not capable of providing adequate redress to successful plaintiffs as its findings on petitions under Article 130(3) of the Constitution were of a purely declaratory nature (for further details see, for example, Chovančík v. Slovakia, no. 54996/00, § 14, 17 June 2003).
  • EKMR, 01.10.1990 - 13091/87

    LEPERLIER contre la FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2003 - 48666/99
    Paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the Convention covers the former and paragraph 5 of Article 5 the latter (see Yağcı and Sargin v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, § 44; Tomasi v. France, judgment of 28 July 1992, Series A no. 241-A, § 79 and Leperlier v. France, No. 13091/87, Commission decision of 1 October 1990, with further reference).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
dejure.org Übersicht EGMR
dejure.org nutzen ohne Ablenkung
Werbung abschalten. Jetzt buchen! Keine automatische Verlängerung.
Info zum PUR-Angebot
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht