Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  E.O. and V.P. v. SLOVAKIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 13, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 36, Art. 36 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
  Preliminary objection dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to length Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 with regard to access to court Not necessary to examine Art. 8 Violation of Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - financial ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 16.09.2003 - 56193/00
• EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 56193/00, 57581/00

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Zitiert selbst (6)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• VGH der UEK, 10.02.2003 - 2/00

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 56193/00

  In decision No. I. ÚS 2/00 of 5 January 2000 the Constitutional Court declared inadmissible a petition in which the plaintiff alleged a violation of Article 19 of the Constitution in that public authorities systematically requested that he should submit his higher education diploma to them.

  They referred, in particular, to the Constitutional Court's decisions No. I. ÚS 2/00, No. I. ÚS 9/00 and No. II. ÚS 23/00.

  As regards the Constitutional Court's practice on which the Government relied, the Court notes that decision No. I. ÚS 2/00 was given on 5 January 2000, that is shortly before the proceedings under consideration were discontinued on 21 January 2000, and that decisions No. II. ÚS 23/00 and No. I. ÚS 9/2000 were given thereafter, in March 2000.

  In case No. I. ÚS 2/00 the plaintiff complained that public authorities systematically requested him to submit his higher education diploma to them.

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 56193/00

  The Court recalls 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 criteria established by its case-law, particularly the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and of 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, 18.02.1999 - 33158/96

  LAINO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 56193/00

  Having regard to the circumstances of the case and to its above finding on the applicants' complaint under Article 6 § 1 relating to the length of the proceedings (see paragraph 86 above), the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine the issues raised under Article 8 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Laino v. Italy [GC], no. 33158/96, § 25, ECHR 1999-I).

• EGMR, 14.10.2003 - 66142/01

  CIZ v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 56193/00

  Furthermore, it has held earlier that prior to a constitutional amendment which entered into force on 1 January 2002 there existed no effective remedy in Slovakia in respect of complaints about excessive length of proceedings (see Číž v. Slovakia, no. 66142/01, §§ 74 and 75, 14 October 2003, with further references).
• RG, 29.03.1895 - 94/95

  Fällt ein Lehrherr, welcher mit seinen minderjährigen, in seiner häuslichen …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 56193/00

  In decision No. II. ÚS 94/95 of 13 December 1995 the Constitutional Court held that the purpose of the right to privacy under Article 16 of the Constitution was not only to protect rights guaranteed by Articles 11 et seq.
• EGMR, 22.10.2002 - 57984/00

  ANDRASIK AND OTHERS v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 56193/00

  57984/00, 60237/00, 60242/00, 60679/00, 60680/00, 68563/01, 60226/00, 22 October 2002).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 12.12.2006 - 54330/00

  PRELOZNIK v. SLOVAKIA

  The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in cases raising issues similar to the one in the present case (see, for example, Frydlender, cited above, and also E.O. and V.P. v. Slovakia, nos. 56193/00 and 57581/00, 27 April 2004, Z.M. and K.P. v. Slovakia, no. 50232/99, 17 May 2005 and Bóna v. Slovakia, 72022/01 17 June 2003).
• EGMR, 13.06.2006 - 7510/04

  KONTROVA v. SLOVAKIA

  56193/00 and 57581/00, 27 April 2004 and Z.M. and K.P. v. Slovakia, no. 50232/99, 17 May 2005).
• EGMR, 17.05.2005 - 50232/99

  Z.M. AND K.P. v. SLOVAKIA

  of the Civil Code in the present case at the admissibility stage and also in another case which had been lodged by Mrs O. and Mr P. and which, in the relevant aspects, was substantially the same as the present one (see E.O. and V.P. v. Slovakia, nos. 56193/00 and 57581/00, §§ 70 - 77, 27 April 2004).
• EGMR, 26.09.2006 - 72094/01

  KVASNICA v. SLOVAKIA

  Although since then there have been changes in social conditions and new trends in the legal environment, which have given rise to a need to regulate by law new types of relationships, in particular in the area of non-pecuniary damage to natural persons (see, for example, the following cases against Slovakia: Kucera (no. 48666/99), Pavletic (no. 39359/98), Tám (no. 50213/99), E.O. and V.P. (nos. 56193/00 and 57581/00) and Z.M. and K.P. (50232/99)), the concept of protection of personal integrity has primarily been applied by the courts in defamation actions (see Kontrová, cited above).
• EGMR, 21.09.2004 - 50232/99

  Z.M. and K.P. v. SLOVAKIA

  of the Civil Code in the same matter (see E.O. and V.P. v. Slovakia, nos. 56193/00 and 57581/00, §§ 70 - 77, 27 April 2004).