Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  JURICIC v. CROATIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 6-1 No violation of Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Juricic v. Croatia

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09
• EGMR, 22.11.2017 - 58222/09

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (28)

• EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89

  SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  Where cases were better dealt with in writing than in oral argument, the Court had held that it was "understandable that in this sphere the national authorities should have regard to the demands of efficiency and economy" (see Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, § 58, Series A no. 263).

  A waiver can be made explicitly or tacitly, in the latter case for example by refraining from submitting or maintaining a request for a hearing (see, for example, Döry, cited above, § 37; Lundevall v. Sweden, no. 38629/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171-A, § 66; and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263, § 58).

  It must therefore be considered that she unequivocally waived her right to a hearing (see Schuler-Zgraggen, cited above, § 58, Series A no. 263; Zumtobel v. Austria, 21 September 1993, § 34, Series A no. 268-A; Fischer, cited above, § 44, Series A no. 312; Döry, cited above, § 38; Lundevall, cited above, § 35; and Sikic v. Croatia, no. 9143/08, § 29, 15 July 2010).

• EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 16922/90

  FISCHER c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  The Court further reiterates that the right to a public hearing generally includes a right to an oral hearing (see, for example, Fischer v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 44, Series A no. 312, and Döry, cited above, § 37).

  It must therefore be considered that she unequivocally waived her right to a hearing (see Schuler-Zgraggen, cited above, § 58, Series A no. 263; Zumtobel v. Austria, 21 September 1993, § 34, Series A no. 268-A; Fischer, cited above, § 44, Series A no. 312; Döry, cited above, § 38; Lundevall, cited above, § 35; and Sikic v. Croatia, no. 9143/08, § 29, 15 July 2010).

• EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 11855/85

  H?KANSSON AND STURESSON v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  A waiver can be made explicitly or tacitly, in the latter case for example by refraining from submitting or maintaining a request for a hearing (see, for example, Döry, cited above, § 37; Lundevall v. Sweden, no. 38629/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171-A, § 66; and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263, § 58).

 
• EGMR, 21.09.1993 - 12235/86

  ZUMTOBEL v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  It must therefore be considered that she unequivocally waived her right to a hearing (see Schuler-Zgraggen, cited above, § 58, Series A no. 263; Zumtobel v. Austria, 21 September 1993, § 34, Series A no. 268-A; Fischer, cited above, § 44, Series A no. 312; Döry, cited above, § 38; Lundevall, cited above, § 35; and Sikic v. Croatia, no. 9143/08, § 29, 15 July 2010).
• EGMR, 06.02.2003 - 71630/01

  A. W. und andere gegen Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  Therefore, the absence of a remedy against the Constitutional Court's decision does not raise an issue under Article 13 of the Convention (see Wendenburg and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 71630/01, ECHR 2003-II).
• EGMR, 08.12.1983 - 8273/78

  Axen ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  By rendering the administration of justice visible, publicity contributes to the achievement of the aim of Article 6 § 1, namely a fair trial, the guarantee of which is one of the fundamental principles of any democratic society, within the meaning of the Convention (see, for example, Axen v. Germany, 8 December 1983, § 25, Series A no. 72; Pretto and Others v. Italy, 8 December 1983, § 21, Series A no. 71, and Martinie v. France [GC], no. 58675/00, § 39, ECHR 2006-...).
• EGMR, 08.12.1983 - 7984/77

  PRETTO ET AUTRES c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  By rendering the administration of justice visible, publicity contributes to the achievement of the aim of Article 6 § 1, namely a fair trial, the guarantee of which is one of the fundamental principles of any democratic society, within the meaning of the Convention (see, for example, Axen v. Germany, 8 December 1983, § 25, Series A no. 72; Pretto and Others v. Italy, 8 December 1983, § 21, Series A no. 71, and Martinie v. France [GC], no. 58675/00, § 39, ECHR 2006-...).
• EGMR, 12.04.2006 - 58675/00

  MARTINIE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  By rendering the administration of justice visible, publicity contributes to the achievement of the aim of Article 6 § 1, namely a fair trial, the guarantee of which is one of the fundamental principles of any democratic society, within the meaning of the Convention (see, for example, Axen v. Germany, 8 December 1983, § 25, Series A no. 72; Pretto and Others v. Italy, 8 December 1983, § 21, Series A no. 71, and Martinie v. France [GC], no. 58675/00, § 39, ECHR 2006-...).
• EGMR, 28.06.2005 - 18114/02

  HERMI v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  Where the proceedings before higher courts involve only questions of law, as opposed to questions of fact, an oral and public hearing is generally not required, provided that such a hearing was held or waived at first instance (see, among many other authorities, Ekbatani v. Sweden, 26 May 1988, §§ 27 and 31, Series A no. 134; Hermi v. Italy [GC], no. 18114/02, §§ 60-61, ECHR 2006-XII, and Döry, cited above, § 40).
• EKMR, 18.12.1980 - 8603/79

  CROCIANI, PALMIOTTI, TANASSI, LEFEBVRE D'OVIDIO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 58222/09

  8603/79, 8722/79, 8723/79 & 8729/79 (joined), Commission decision of 18 December 1980, DR 22, p. 224, § 15).
• EGMR, 26.04.2007 - 2881/04

  PRISCHL v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 74459/01

  NOVOTKA v. SLOVAKIA
• EKMR, 23.10.1997 - 30470/96

  ZIPPEL v. GERMANY
• EKMR, 11.04.1991 - 14644/89

  TIMES NEWSPAPERS LTD ; NEIL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 23.11.2006 - 73053/01

  JUSSILA v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 27.10.1993 - 14448/88

  DOMBO BEHEER B.V. v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 19.04.2007 - 63235/00

  VILHO ESKELINEN AND OTHERS v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 08.12.1999 - 28541/95

  PELLEGRIN v. FRANCE
• EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 28394/95

  DÖRY v. SWEDEN
• EGMR, 31.01.1986 - 8734/79

  BARTHOLD v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50)
• EGMR, 21.06.2005 - 61811/00

  MILATOVÁ AND OTHERS v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
• EGMR, 08.02.2001 - 47936/99

  PITKEVICH v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 25.11.2003 - 57795/00

  PURSIHEIMO v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 05.01.2010 - 9125/07

  PENTTINEN v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 29.07.2008 - 28301/03

  S. H. v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 20774/05

  FIUME c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 33761/02

  JOSEPHIDES v. CYPRUS