germany ozturk v

26 resultados para germany ozturk v

  • Valoración vLex
  • Sentencia de European Court of Human Rights, 21 de Febrero de 1984 (caso CASE OF ÖZTÜRK v. GERMANY)

    1. The present case was referred to the Court by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany ("the Government") and the European Commission of Human Rights ("the Commission"). The case originated in an application (no. 8544/79) against that State lodged with the Commission on 14 February 1979 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Conventi...

  • Judgment (Merits) de European Court of Human Rights, 21 de Febrero de 1984 (caso CASE OF ÖZTÜRK v. GERMANY)

    Violation of Art. 6-3-e Just satisfaction reserved

  • Sentencia de European Court of Human Rights, 15 de Diciembre de 1981 (caso ÖZTÜRK v. the FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY)

    Abdulbaki ()ZTIJRK v/the FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY Abdulbaki UZTüRK c/RÉPUBLIQUE FEDÉRALE D'ALLEMAGN E DECISION of 15 December 1981 on the admissibility of the application DECISION du 15 décembre 1981 sur la recevabilité de la requête Article 6, paragraph 3 (e) of the Conventlon : Is this provision applicable to the appeal proceedings against an

  • Judgment (Just Satisfaction) de European Court of Human Rights, 23 de Octubre de 1984 (caso CASE OF ÖZTÜRK v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50))

    Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Costs and expenses - claim dismissed

  • Criminalisation of EU Competition Law Enforcement: The Long and Winding Road

    ...Thus, we can see “ business people from Canada, France, Germany, Sweden, and Switzerland […] in US prisons for violating US antitrust law ”, 70 as ...Belgium, A/43, of 1.2.1983, Albert le Compte v. Belgium A/58, of 21.2.1984, Özturk v. Germany, A/73 and of 24.2.1994, Bendenou v. France A/284. . WILS, W.P.J., supra note 5 p.122 ...

  • Sentencia de European Court of Human Rights, 15 de Noviembre de 2016 (caso A AND B v. NORWAY)

    No violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 - Right not to be tried or punished twice-{general} (Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 - Right not to be tried or punished twice;Criminal offence)

    ...As at the date of delivery of this Opinion, Protocol No 7 has still not been ratified by Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Among the Member States which have ratified the ...a. The policy trend towards decriminalisation. b. Öztürk and the “criminalisation” of petty offences. B. Tax penalties as a criminal policy instrument. ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de Court (Fourth Section), 13 de Noviembre de 2012 (caso CASE OF HRISTOZOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA)

    Remainder inadmissible No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations) (Procedural aspect) No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)

    ...China, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Mexico, Paraguay, South Africa,. Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United ... relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and the Court’s judgments in the cases of Öztürk v. Germany (21 February 1984, Series A no. 73) and Lauko v. Slovakia (2 September 1998, Reports of ...

  • Judgments nº C-501/11 P de Court of Justice, 18 de Julio de 2013

    (Appeal – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for the installation and maintenance of elevators and escalators – Liability of the parent company for infringements of the law on cartels committed by its subsidiary – Holding company – Internal compliance programme – Fundamental rights – Principles of the rule of law in the context

    ... Schindler Deutschland Holding GmbH, established in Berlin (Germany),. represented by R. Bechtold and W. Bosch, Rechtsanwälte, and J. Schwarze, ... the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights resulting from its judgments in Öztürk v. Germany , 21 February 1984, Series A no. 73 and Bendenoun v. France , 24 February 1994, Series ...

  • Opinions nº C-260/13 de Court of Justice, 4 de Septiembre de 2014

    Request for a preliminary ruling – Verwaltungsgericht Sigmaringen – Interpretation of Article 2(1) and Article 11(2) of Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences (OJ L 403, p. 18) – Mutual recognition of driving licences – Refusal of a Member State to recognise, in the case of a person having driven under the influence of narcotic...

    ... State in whose territory the offence was committed, in this case the Federal Republic of Germany, the driving licence was withdrawn within that territory, as the person concerned was no longer fit ...I was referring to its judgment in Öztürk v. Germany of 21 February 1984, (32) which relates to road traffic offences. Following that ...

  • Judgments nº T-380/10 de The General Court, 16 de Septiembre de 2013

    (Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria – Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Coordination of price increases and exchange of sensitive business information – Distortion...

    ..., decisions and concerted practices – Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria – Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 ... and 176; the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights of 21 February 1984 in Öztürk v. Germany , Series A no 73, and of 25 August 1987 in Lutz v. Germany , Series A no 123). ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de Court (First Section), 14 de Noviembre de 2013 (caso CASE OF BLOKHIN v. RUSSIA)

    Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty Article 5-1-d - Minors) Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing Article 6-3-c - Defence...

    ...Russia, no. 30194/09, § 54, 21 June 2011; M. v. Germany, no. 19359/04, §§ 89 and 102, ECHR 2009; and Ostendorf v. Germany, no. 15598/08, § 66, 7 March ...

  • Sentencia de European Court of Human Rights, 23 de Marzo de 2016 (caso BLOKHIN v. RUSSIA)

    Preliminary objections dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Six month period);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Article 5-1-d - Minors);Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6

    ...Germany, 21 February 1984, § 49, Series A no. 73; Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, 28 June 1984, ...

  • Resolution (Merits) de European Court of Human Rights, 9 de Julio de 2015 (caso CASE OF TOLMACHEV v. ESTONIA)

    Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance)

    ...France, 23 September 1998, § 45, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998‑VII; and Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 56, Series A no. 73). 44. In the present case the applicant had ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de European Court of Human Rights, 14 de Noviembre de 2013 (caso CASE OF BLOKHIN v. RUSSIA)

    Remainder inadmissible ; Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment ; Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) ; Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty ; Article 5-1-d - Minors) ; Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings ; Article 6-1 - Fair hearing ; Article 6-3

    ...30194/09, § 54, 21 June 2011; M. v. Germany, no. 19359/04, §§ 89 and 102, ECHR 2009; and Ostendorf v. Germany, no. 15598/08, § 66, 7 ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de Court (Second Section), 4 de Marzo de 2014 (caso CASE OF GRANDE STEVENS AND OTHERS v. ITALY)

    Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Public hearing) No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-3 - Rights of defence Article 6-3-a - Information on nature and cause of accusation) Article 6-3-c - Defence in person Defence through legal assistance) No violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Artic

    ... head, as the indications furnished by the domestic law have only a relative value (see Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 52, Series A no. 73, and Menarini Diagnostics S.r.l., cited above, ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de Court (Second Section), 4 de Marzo de 2014

    Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings ; Article 6-1 - Public hearing) ; No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-3 - Rights of defence ; Article 6-3-a - Information on nature and cause of accusation) ; No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-3 - Rights of defence ; Article 6-3-c - Defence in person ; Defence...

    ... head, as the indications furnished by the domestic law have only a relative value (see Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 52, Series A no. 73, and Menarini Diagnostics S.r.l., cited ...

  • Sentencia de European Court of Human Rights, 19 de Noviembre de 2015 (caso MIKHAYLOVA v. RUSSIA)

    Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Criminal charge) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial;Article 6-3-c - Free legal assistance);Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Criminal charge) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial;Article 6-3-c - Free legal assistance);Pecu

    ... existence of a “criminal charge” for the purpose of Article 6 of the Convention (see Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 49, Series A no. 73, and, more recently, Ezeh and Connors v. the ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de Court (Third Section), 24 de Septiembre de 2013 (caso CASE OF SARDÓN ALVIRA v. SPAIN)

    Preliminary objection joined to merits (Article 35-3 - Ratione materiae) Remainder inadmissible No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings Article 6-1 - Civil rights and obligations Criminal charge Fair hearing)

    ...the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, § 82, Series A no. 22, and Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 50, Series A no. 73). The Court further observes that a ...

  • Opinions nº C-43/12 de Court of Justice, 10 de Septiembre de 2013

    Action for annulment – Directive 2011/82/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 facilitating the cross-border exchange of information on road safety related traffic offences (OJ 2011 L 288, p. 1) – Choice of legal basis – Replacing the proposed legal basis in the field of common transport policy by another, in the field of police cooperation – Purpose of improving...

    ... to the judgment of 21 February 1984 of the European Court of Human Rights in Öztürk v Germany , (37) which relates to road traffic offences. Following that functional approach, ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de Court (Fifth Section), 28 de Febrero de 2013 (caso CASE OF MESESNEL v. SLOVENIA)

    Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-3-d - Examination of witnesses)

    ... to the proceedings complained of by the applicant, and sees no reason to disagree (see Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, §§ 46-56, Series A no. 73; Falk v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. ...

  • Decision de Court (First Section), 6 de Noviembre de 2012 (caso TOTH v. CROATIA)

    Inadmissible

    ... by its nature and degree of severity, belongs in general to the “criminal” sphere (see Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, Series A no. 73, § 54, and Lutz v. Germany, 25 August 1987, Series A ...

  • Decision de European Court of Human Rights, 5 de Octubre de 2010 (caso GEREN v. BULGARIA)

    The applicant, Mr Mustafa Geren, is a Turkish national who was born in 1952 and lives in Istanbul. He is represented before the Court by Mr Gökmen Ergűr, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Bulgarian Government ("the Government") are represented by their Agent, Mrs R. Nikolova from the Ministry of Justice. THE FACTS The facts of the ca...

    ...Germany, 28 November 1978, Series A no. 29, Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, Series A no. 73 and ...

  • Decision de Court (Fifth Section Committee), 5 de Octubre de 2010 (caso GEREN v. BULGARIA)

    The applicant, Mr Mustafa Geren, is a Turkish national who was born in 1952 and lives in Istanbul. He is represented before the Court by Mr Gökmen Ergűr, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mrs R. Nikolova from the Ministry of Justice. THE FACTS The facts of the case, as sub...

    ...Germany, 28 November 1978, Series A no. 29, Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, Series A no. 73 and ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de Court (Fourth Section), 13 de Noviembre de 2012 (caso CASE OF HRISTOZOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA)

    Remainder inadmissible No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations) (Procedural aspect) No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)

    ... terms, see paragraphs 50, 56 and 57 below) in a number of countries (the Bahamas, China, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Mexico, Paraguay, South Africa, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United ... relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and the Court’s judgments in the cases of Öztürk v. Germany (21 February 1984, Series A no. 73), and Lauko v. Slovakia (2 September 1998, Reports of ...

  • Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) de Court (Fourth Section), 13 de Noviembre de 2012

    Remainder inadmissible ; No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations) (Procedural aspect) ; No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment ; Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) ; No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)

    ... terms, see paragraphs 50, 56 and 57 below) in a number of countries (the Bahamas, China, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Mexico, Paraguay, South Africa, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United ... relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and the Court’s judgments in the cases of Öztürk v. Germany (21 February 1984, Series A no. 73), and Lauko v. Slovakia (2 September 1998, Reports of ...