Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TOIVANEN v. FINLAND

  No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Impartial tribunal) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  TOIVANEN v. FINLAND

  Art. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

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

• EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 1128/17

  Meng ./. Deutschland - Konventionsverletzung durch Beteiligung eines nicht …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 46131/19

  Consequently, even assuming that there were defects in the appellate proceedings, the Supreme Court did remedy the defects in question, being irrelevant that it rejected the arguments of the applicant in that regard (see Ramos Nunes de Carvalho e Sá, cited above, § 132; contrast Meng v. Germany, no. 1128/17, § 64, 16 February 2021).
• EGMR, 12.01.2016 - 57774/13

  MIRACLE EUROPE KFT v. HUNGARY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 46131/19

  The Court is mindful that issues regarding the allocation of a case to a particular court, formation or judge are usually examined under the "established by law" aspect of Article 6 (see, for example, Miracle Europe Kft v. Hungary, no. 57774/13, §§ 62-67, 12 January 2016; DMD GROUP, a.s., v. Slovakia, no. 19334/03, § 65 et seq, 5 October 2010; Pasquini v. San Marino, no. 50956/16, §§ 106-13, 2 May 2019; and contrast, Tempel v. the Czech Republic, no. 44151/12, § 65 and § 71, 25 June 2020).
• EGMR, 02.05.2019 - 50956/16

  PASQUINI v. SAN MARINO

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 46131/19

  The Court is mindful that issues regarding the allocation of a case to a particular court, formation or judge are usually examined under the "established by law" aspect of Article 6 (see, for example, Miracle Europe Kft v. Hungary, no. 57774/13, §§ 62-67, 12 January 2016; DMD GROUP, a.s., v. Slovakia, no. 19334/03, § 65 et seq, 5 October 2010; Pasquini v. San Marino, no. 50956/16, §§ 106-13, 2 May 2019; and contrast, Tempel v. the Czech Republic, no. 44151/12, § 65 and § 71, 25 June 2020).

 
• EGMR, 04.10.2022 - 16358/18

  ANGERJÄRV AND GREINOMAN v. ESTONIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 46131/19

  In the circumstances of the case, the Court does not find any reason to call that matter into question (see Angerjärv and Greinoman v. Estonia, nos. 16358/18 and 34964/18, § 98, 4 October 2022).
• EGMR, 25.06.2020 - 44151/12

  TEMPEL v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 46131/19

  The Court is mindful that issues regarding the allocation of a case to a particular court, formation or judge are usually examined under the "established by law" aspect of Article 6 (see, for example, Miracle Europe Kft v. Hungary, no. 57774/13, §§ 62-67, 12 January 2016; DMD GROUP, a.s., v. Slovakia, no. 19334/03, § 65 et seq, 5 October 2010; Pasquini v. San Marino, no. 50956/16, §§ 106-13, 2 May 2019; and contrast, Tempel v. the Czech Republic, no. 44151/12, § 65 and § 71, 25 June 2020).
• EGMR, 04.04.2000 - 30342/96

  ACADEMY TRADING LTD AND OTHERS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 46131/19

  On the basis of the detailed explanation by the Supreme Court as to how the criteria in that provision were to be interpreted and how they had been met in the applicant's case (see paragraphs 16-19 above), the Court does not find any grounds for doubting that the conditions for a transfer had objectively been met and that a plausible explanation of the procedures followed was provided (see, mutatis mutandis, Academy Trading Ltd and Others v. Greece, no. 30342/96, § 46, 4 April 2000).
• EGMR, 17.11.2009 - 39279/05

  IWANCZUK v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 46131/19

  Thus far, the Court is satisfied that the transfer of the case from the three-judge bench to the extended composition was in compliance with the relevant criteria under its established case-law (see Iwanczuk v. Poland (dec.), no. 39279/05, 17 November 2009 and DMD GROUP, a.s., cited above, § 66) and it did not in and of itself lead to the applicant's trial becoming unfair within the meaning of Article 6 of the Convention.