Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  CALLEJA v. MALTA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 18.03.2004 - 75274/01
• EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 75274/01

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 15.01.2004 - 61828/00

  SAKKOPOULOS c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 75274/01

  It is therefore appropriate to reimburse only in part the costs and expenses alleged by the applicant (see, mutatis mutandis, Nikolova v. Bulgaria, no. 31195/96, § 79, ECHR 1999-II; Sakkopoulos v. Greece, no. 61828/00, § 59, 15 January 2004; Cianetti v. Italy, no. 55634/00, § 56, 22 April 2004).
• EGMR, 22.04.2004 - 55634/00

  CIANETTI c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 75274/01

  It is therefore appropriate to reimburse only in part the costs and expenses alleged by the applicant (see, mutatis mutandis, Nikolova v. Bulgaria, no. 31195/96, § 79, ECHR 1999-II; Sakkopoulos v. Greece, no. 61828/00, § 59, 15 January 2004; Cianetti v. Italy, no. 55634/00, § 56, 22 April 2004).
• EGMR, 01.07.2004 - 36681/97

  VITO SANTE SANTORO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 75274/01

  Having regard to the elements at its disposal and on the basis of an equitable assessment, the Court awards the applicant EUR 2, 500 under this head (see, mutatis mutandis, Santoro v. Italy, no. 36681/97, § 68, 1 July 2004).

 
• EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

  PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 75274/01

  Under the Court's case-law, the reasonableness of the length of proceedings is to be assessed in the light of the particular circumstances of the case, regard being had to the criteria laid down in the Court's case-law, in particular the complexity of the case, the applicant's conduct and the conduct of the competent authorities (see, among many other authorities, Kemmache v. France (Nos 1 and 2), judgment of 27 November 1991, Series A no. 218, p. 27, § 60; Philis v. Greece (No. 2), judgment of 27 June 1997, Reports 1997-IV, p. 1083, § 35; Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, CEDH 1999-II).
• EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87

  TOMASI c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 75274/01

  However, the existence of a strong suspicion of the involvement of a person in serious offences, while constituting a relevant factor, cannot alone justify a long period of pre-trial detention (see Tomasi v. France, judgment of 27 August 1992, Series A no. 241-A, p. 35, § 89, and Scott v. Spain, judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI, p. 2401, § 78).
• EGMR, 26.01.1993 - 14379/88

  W. c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 75274/01

  Continued detention can be justified in a given case only if there are specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty (see, among other authorities, W. v. Switzerland, judgment of 26 January 1993, Series A no. 254-A, p. 15, § 30, and Pantano v. Italy, no. 60851/00, § 66, 6 November 2003).
• EGMR, 15.07.1982 - 8130/78

  Eckle ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2005 - 75274/01

  "Charge", for the purposes of Article 6 § 1, may be defined as "the official notification given to an individual by the competent authority of an allegation that he has committed a criminal offence", a definition that also corresponds to the test whether "the situation of the [suspect] has been substantially affected" (see Eckle v. Germany, judgment of 15 July 1982, Series A no. 51, p. 33, § 73, and Reinhardt and Slimane-Kaïd v. France, judgment of 3 March 1998, Reports 1998-II, p. 660, § 93).