Source: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=EGMR&Datum=09.11.2018&Aktenzeichen=71409/10
Timestamp: 2019-05-27 14:33:57+00:00

Document:
EGMR, 09.11.2018 - 71409/10 - dejure.org
EGMR, 09.11.2018 - 71409/10
https://dejure.org/2018,36559
EGMR, 09.11.2018 - 71409/10 (https://dejure.org/2018,36559)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 09.11.2018 - 71409/10 (https://dejure.org/2018,36559)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 09. November 2018 - 71409/10 (https://dejure.org/2018,36559)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2018,36559) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
BEUZE c. BELGIQUE
Violation de l'article 6 - Droit à un procès équitable (Article 6 - Procédure pénale;Article 6-1 - Procès équitable;Article 6-3 - Droits de la défense;Article 6-3-c - Se défendre avec l'assistance d'un défenseur);Préjudice moral - constat de violation suffisant (Article 41 - Préjudice moral;Satisfaction équitable) (französisch)
BEUZE v. BELGIUM
Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Article 6-3 - Rights of defence;Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c MRK
EGMR - 34392/10 (anhängig)
SAYGILI v. TURKEY
The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings due to the systemic restriction imposed on the applicant's right of access to a lawyer during the pre-trial stage pursuant to Law no. 3842 and the subsequent use by the trial court of the statements taken in the absence of a lawyer and allegedly under duress (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, ECHR 2008; Özcan Çolak v. Turkey, no. 30235/03, §§ 47-50, 6 October 2009; Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016; and Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018).
Has there been a breach of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention, in conjunction with Article 6 § 1, having regard to the principles adopted by the Grand Chamber in the cases of Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom ([GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016) and Beuze v. Belgium ([GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018)?.
EGMR, 24.01.2019 - 76577/13
Italien verurteilt: 18.000 Euro Entschädigung für Amanda Knox
Les principes généraux concernant l'applicabilité de l'article 6 de la Convention sous son volet pénal, le droit à l'assistance d'un avocat et l'équité globale de la procédure pénale, la restriction temporaire de l'accès à un avocat pour des raisons impérieuses et l'impact des lacunes procédurales survenues au stade de l'enquête sur l'équité globale du procès pénal sont établis, en tout ou en partie, dans les arrêts Simeonovi c. Bulgarie ([GC], no 21980/04, §§ 110-120, 12 mai 2017), Ibrahim et autres c. Royaume-Uni ([GC], nos 50541/08 et 3 autres, §§ 249-274, 13 septembre 2016), Salduz c. Turquie ([GC], no 36391/02, §§ 50-55, CEDH 2008) et Beuze c. Belgique ([GC], no 71409/10, §§ 119-150, 9 novembre 2018).
EGMR - 73552/11 (anhängig)
The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings due to the systemic restriction imposed on the applicant's right of access to a lawyer during the pre-trial stage pursuant to Law no. 3842 and the subsequent use by the trial court of the statements taken in the absence of a lawyer (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, ECHR 2008; Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016; and Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018).
Did the applicant have a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, having regard to the principles adopted by the Grand Chamber in the cases of Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom ([GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016) and Beuze v. Belgium ([GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018), has there been a breach of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention?.
EGMR - 74345/11 (anhängig)
SARAR v. TURKEY
The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings due to the systemic restriction imposed on the applicant's right of access to a lawyer during the pre-trial stage pursuant to Law no. 3842, the subsequent use by the trial court of evidence obtained in the absence of a lawyer and allegedly under duress to convict him (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, ECHR 2008; Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016; Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018; and Özcan Çolak v. Turkey, no. 30235/03, 6 October 2009).
Did the applicant have a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, having regard to the principles adopted by the Grand Chamber in the case of Ibrahim and Others (v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08, 50571/08, 50573/08 and 40351/09, 13 September 2016) and Beuze (v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018), has there been a breach of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention?.
EGMR - 58089/11 (anhängig)
ULU v. TURKEY
Did the applicant have a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, having regard to the principles adopted by the Grand Chamber in the case of Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom ([GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016) and Beuze v. Belgium ([GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018), has there been a breach of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention?.
EGMR - 35935/10 (anhängig)
KORKMAZ v. TURKEY
EGMR - 13874/10 (anhängig)
SEVIM AND ÖNCEL v. TURKEY
The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings due to the systemic restriction imposed on the applicants" right of access to a lawyer during the pre-trial stage pursuant to Law no. 3842 and the subsequent use by the trial court of the statements taken in the absence of a lawyer (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, ECHR 2008; Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016; and Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018).
Did the applicants have a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, having regard to the principles adopted by the Grand Chamber in the case of Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom ([GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016) and Beuze v. Belgium ([GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018), has there been a breach of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention?.
EGMR - 13549/11 (anhängig)
KAHRAMAN v. TURKEY
The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings due to the systemic restriction imposed on the applicant's right of access to a lawyer during the pre-trial stage pursuant to Law no. 3842 and the subsequent use by the trial court of the statements taken in the absence of a lawyer (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, ECHR 2008; Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, ECHR 2016; and Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018).
Did the applicant have a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, having regard to the principles adopted by the Grand Chamber in the case of Ibrahim and Others (v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08, 50571/08, 50573/08 and 40351/09, 13 September 2016) and Beuze (v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018), has there been a breach of Article 6 § § 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention?.
EGMR - 72827/10 (anhängig)
ASLAN v. TURKEY
The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings due to the systemic restriction imposed on the applicant's right of access to a lawyer during the pre-trial stage pursuant to Law no. 3842 and the subsequent use by the trial court of those statements taken in the absence of a lawyer (see Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, ECHR 2008, and Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, ECHR 2016; and Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, 9 November 2018).
EGMR - 42943/09 (anhängig)
DIL v. TURKEY
EGMR - 59213/10 (anhängig)
DAMAR v. TURKEY
EGMR - 27300/12 (anhängig)
TANDOGAN v. TURKEY
EGMR, 16.04.2019 - 12224/09
ALAKHVERDYAN v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 43154/10
DAKTARAS v. LITHUANIA
EGMR - 58080/11 (anhängig)
INAN v. TURKEY
EGMR - 9418/13 (anhängig)
KARTOYEV c. RUSSIE et 2 autres affaires

References: l'article 6

Art. 6
 Art. 6
 Art. 6
 § 3
 § 1
 l'article 6
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1