Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 72269/01 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2005,64276) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 72269/01
- EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 72269/01
Wird zitiert von ... (2)
- EGMR, 14.12.2023 - 50704/15
YAKOVLYEVA v. UKRAINE
In the leading cases of Lazarenko and Others v. Ukraine (nos. 70329/12 and 5 others, 27 June 2017) and Strizhak v. Ukraine (no. 72269/01, 8 November 2005), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. - EGMR - 27358/16 (anhängig)
CHEREDNICHENKO v. UKRAINE and 3 other applications
Was the review of the applicant's case by the Supreme Court of Ukraine compatible with the principle of equality of arms within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention regard being had to her allegations that she had not been notified of the proceedings (see, mutatis mutandis, Strizhak v. Ukraine, no. 72269/01, §§ 38-41, 8 November 2005 and Lazarenko and Others v. Ukraine, nos.
Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 72269/01 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2004,52818) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 72269/01
- EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 72269/01
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 72269/01
Having regard to the criteria established by the case-law of the Convention, i.e. the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the conduct of the judicial authorities (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-XI, § 124), the Court is of the opinion that the length of the proceedings in the present case did not exceed a 'reasonable time' within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. - EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82
BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 72269/01
The effect of Article 13 is thus to require the provision of a domestic remedy allowing the competent "national authority" both to deal with the substance of the relevant Convention complaint and to grant appropriate relief, although Contracting States are afforded some discretion as to the manner in which they comply with their obligations under Article 13. However, Article 13 requires a remedy in domestic law only in respect of grievances which can be regarded as "arguable" in terms of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, § 54 and Stockholms Försäkrings- och Skadeståndsjuridik AB v. Sweden, no. 38993/97, judgment of 16 September 2003, § 68). - EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 18139/91
TOLSTOY MILOSLAVSKY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 72269/01
It recalls that this right is recognised as a 'civil right' within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 (see, for instance, Helmers v. Sweden, judgment of 29 October 1991, Series A no. 212-A, p. 14, § 27; Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 316-B, § 58). - EGMR, 29.10.1991 - 11826/85
HELMERS c. SUÈDE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 72269/01
It recalls that this right is recognised as a 'civil right' within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 (see, for instance, Helmers v. Sweden, judgment of 29 October 1991, Series A no. 212-A, p. 14, § 27; Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 316-B, § 58).