Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  FOX v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 3, Art. 35 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Zitiert selbst (3)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Einstufung des in französischer Haft zugefügten Übels als Folter - Verpflichtung …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 61319/09

  The Court recalls the requirements of the rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies summarised in its judgment in Selmouni v. France ([GC], no. 25803/94, §§ 74-77, ECHR 1999 V):.
• EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7654/76

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 61319/09

  The rule has been applied strictly; even, for example, in a case when legal aid is not available to bring costly national proceedings, including constitutional proceedings (see D. v Ireland, cited above; see also Cyprus v. Turkey [GC], no. 25781/94, § 352, ECHR 2001-IV; and Van Oosterwijck v. Belgium, 6 November 1980, § 38, Series A no. 40).
• EGMR, 28.06.2006 - 26499/02

  D. v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 61319/09

  However, an applicant is not required to use a remedy which, "according to settled legal opinion existing at the relevant time", offers no reasonable prospects of providing redress for his complaint (see D. v. Ireland (dec.), no. 26499/02, §§ 89 and 91, 28 June 2006, and the other cases referenced therein).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 29.01.2013 - 1497/10

  [ENG]

  The Court is accordingly persuaded that any appeal to the Court of Appeal did not offer to the applicant reasonable prospects of success (contrast Fox v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 61319/09, §§ 44-45, 20 March 2012).
• EGMR, 27.10.2015 - 76760/12

  N.J.D.B. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  However, an applicant is not required to use a remedy which, "according to settled legal opinion existing at the relevant time", offers no reasonable prospects of providing redress for his complaint (see D. v. Ireland (dec.), no. 26499/02, §§ 89 and 91, 28 June 2006; and, more recently, Fox v the United Kingdom (dec.) 61319/09, § 42 20 March 2012).
• EGMR, 05.09.2017 - 181/14

  GADD v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  However, an applicant is not required to use a remedy which, "according to settled legal opinion existing at the relevant time", offers no reasonable prospects of providing redress for his complaint (see D. v. Ireland, cited above, §§ 89 and 91 and, more recently, Fox v the United Kingdom (dec.) 61319/09, § 42 20 March 2012).

• EGMR, 05.01.2016 - 35752/13

  BAHMANZADEH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  However, an applicant is not required to use a remedy which, "according to settled legal opinion existing at the relevant time", offers no reasonable prospects of providing redress for his complaint (see D. v. Ireland (dec.), no. 26499/02, §§ 89 and 91, 28 June 2006; and, more recently, Fox v the United Kingdom (dec.) 61319/09, § 42 20 March 2012).
• EGMR, 05.01.2016 - 59703/13

  ROBERTS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  However, an applicant is not required to use a remedy which, "according to settled legal opinion existing at the relevant time", offers no reasonable prospects of providing redress for his complaint (see D. v. Ireland (dec.), no. 26499/02, §§ 89 and 91, 28 June 2006; and, more recently, Fox v. the United Kingdom (dec.) 61319/09, § 42 20 March 2012).
• EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 39678/09

  [ENG]

  However, an applicant is not required to use a remedy which, "according to settled legal opinion existing at the relevant time", offers no reasonable prospects of providing redress for his complaint (see Fox v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 61319/09, 20 March 2012).