Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VATEVI v. BULGARIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Not necessary to examine P1-1 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.09.2006 - 55956/00

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97

  ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.09.2006 - 55956/00

  In the instant case, the Court considers that the hourly rate of EUR 70 is excessive and that a reduction of the same is appropriate (see, a contrario, Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 176 in fine, ECHR 2002-IV, Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 111, 30 January 2003; Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 75, 19 May 2004, and Rachevi v. Bulgaria, no. 47877/99, § 111, 23 September 2004, where the Court found an hourly rate of EUR 50 reasonable).
• EGMR, 30.01.2003 - 38884/97

  NIKOLOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.09.2006 - 55956/00

  In the instant case, the Court considers that the hourly rate of EUR 70 is excessive and that a reduction of the same is appropriate (see, a contrario, Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 176 in fine, ECHR 2002-IV, Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 111, 30 January 2003; Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 75, 19 May 2004, and Rachevi v. Bulgaria, no. 47877/99, § 111, 23 September 2004, where the Court found an hourly rate of EUR 50 reasonable).
• EGMR, 19.05.2004 - 42027/98

  TOTEVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.09.2006 - 55956/00

  In the instant case, the Court considers that the hourly rate of EUR 70 is excessive and that a reduction of the same is appropriate (see, a contrario, Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 176 in fine, ECHR 2002-IV, Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 111, 30 January 2003; Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 75, 19 May 2004, and Rachevi v. Bulgaria, no. 47877/99, § 111, 23 September 2004, where the Court found an hourly rate of EUR 50 reasonable).
• EGMR, 23.09.2004 - 47877/99

  RACHEVI v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.09.2006 - 55956/00

  In the instant case, the Court considers that the hourly rate of EUR 70 is excessive and that a reduction of the same is appropriate (see, a contrario, Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 176 in fine, ECHR 2002-IV, Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 111, 30 January 2003; Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 75, 19 May 2004, and Rachevi v. Bulgaria, no. 47877/99, § 111, 23 September 2004, where the Court found an hourly rate of EUR 50 reasonable).

• EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 5131/06

  SHEYTANOV v. BULGARIA

  In view of its extensive and clear case law in respect of the violation of the above mentioned guarantees of Article 6 § 1 of Convention, including in cases brought against Bulgaria (see, for example Rachevi v. Bulgaria, no. 47877/99, 23 September 2004; Vatevi v. Bulgaria, no. 55956/00, 28 September 2006; Kambourov v. Bulgaria, no. 55350/00, 14 February 2008, Stankov v. Bulgaria, no. 68490/01, ECHR 2007-VIII and Mihalkov v. Bulgaria, no. 67719/01, 10 April 2008), the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of this part of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine).
• EGMR, 01.12.2009 - 43009/04

  KANCHEVA c. BULGARIE

  Compte tenu de la reconnaissance de la violation contenue dans la déclaration du Gouvernement, ainsi que de la somme proposée, qui constitue une réparation adéquate au sens de sa jurisprudence (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Frydlender c. France [GC], no 30979/96, CEDH 2000-VII, Djangozov c. Bulgarie, no 45950/99, 8 juillet 2004; Vatevi c. Bulgarie, no 55956/00, 28 septembre 2006; Babitchkine c. Bulgarie, no 56793/00, 10 août 2006), la Cour estime qu'il ne se justifie plus de poursuivre l'examen de la requête (article 37 § 1 c) de la Convention).
• EGMR, 02.06.2009 - 17366/04

  TANCHEV ET AUTRES c. BULGARIE

  Compte tenu de la reconnaissance de la violation contenue dans la déclaration du Gouvernement, ainsi que de la somme proposée, qui constitue une réparation adéquate au sens de sa jurisprudence (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Frydlender c. France [GC], no 30979/96, CEDH 2000-VII, Djangozov c. Bulgarie, no 45950/99, 8 juillet 2004; Vatevi c. Bulgarie, no 55956/00, 28 septembre 2006; Babitchkine c. Bulgarie, no 56793/00, 10 août 2006), la Cour estime qu'il ne se justifie plus de poursuivre l'examen de la requête (article 37 § 1 c) de la Convention).
• EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 28936/03

  VELIKIN ET AUTRES c. BULGARIE

  Compte tenu de la reconnaissance de violation contenue dans la déclaration du Gouvernement, ainsi que de la somme proposée, qui constitue une réparation adéquate au sens de sa jurisprudence (voir, parmi d'autres, Frydlender c. France [GC], no 30979/96, CEDH 2000-VII ; Djangozov c. Bulgarie, no 45950/99, 8 juillet 2004 ; Vatevi c. Bulgarie, no 55956/00, 28 septembre 2006), la Cour considère qu'il ne se justifie plus de poursuivre l'examen de la requête au sens de l'article 37 § 1 c) de la Convention.
• EGMR, 02.02.2010 - 17737/05

  ZLATEV c. BULGARIE

  Compte tenu de la reconnaissance de violation contenue dans la déclaration du Gouvernement, ainsi que de la somme proposée, qui constitue une réparation adéquate au sens de sa jurisprudence (voir, parmi d'autres, Frydlender c. France [GC], no 30979/96, CEDH 2000-VII ; Djangozov c. Bulgarie, no 45950/99, 8 juillet 2004 ; Vatevi c. Bulgarie, no 55956/00, 28 septembre 2006), la Cour estime qu'il ne se justifie plus de poursuivre l'examen de ce grief (article 37 § 1 c) de la Convention).