Source: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=EGMR&Datum=11.10.2005&Aktenzeichen=4773/02
Timestamp: 2019-10-17 22:03:20+00:00
Document Index: 233254845

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 54', '§ 42', '§ 12', '§ 42', '§ 28', '§ 38', '§ 42']

EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 4773/02 - dejure.org
https://dejure.org/2005,55474
EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 4773/02 (https://dejure.org/2005,55474)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 11.10.2005 - 4773/02 (https://dejure.org/2005,55474)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 11. Januar 2005 - 4773/02 (https://dejure.org/2005,55474)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2005,55474) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 35 Abs. 3, Art. 35 Abs. 4, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 6-1 (length of proceedings) Violation of Art. 13 Remainder inadmissible Pecuniary damage - financial award Non-pecuniary damage - financial award (englisch)
EGMR, 07.09.2004 - 4773/02
Dans l'affaire Sychev c. Ukraine (no 4773/02, §§ 54-56, 11 octobre 2005), la Cour a examiné le statut du comité de liquidation pour conclure que l'inexécution prolongée par celui-ci d'une décision de justice était due à « l'absence de mise en place par l'Etat d'un mécanisme effectif d'exécution des jugements rendus contre une société visée par une procédure de faillite » (voir aussi Pokutnaya c. Russie (déc.), no 26856/04, 3 juillet 2008).
EGMR, 15.10.2009 - 30664/05
The Government raised objections regarding the non-enforcement by the applicant of domestic remedies, similar to those which the Court has already dismissed in a number of judgments (see Sokur v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 29439/02, 16 December 2003; Sychev v. Ukraine, no. 4773/02, §§ 42-46, 11 October 2005; and Kolosenko v. Ukraine, no. 40200/02, §§ 12-15, 26 April 2007).
EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 16092/05
The Government raised objections, contested by the applicant, regarding exhaustion of domestic remedies similar to those already dismissed in a number of the Court's judgments regarding non-enforcement of judgments against the public companies (see e.g. among many others, Sychev v. Ukraine, no. 4773/02, §§ 42-46, 11 October 2005 and Romashov v. Ukraine, cited above, no. 67534/01, §§ 28-32).
The Government raised objections, contested by the applicants, regarding exhaustion of domestic remedies similar to those already dismissed in a number of the Court's judgments regarding non-enforcement of judgments against the State-owned companies (see e.g. among many others, Mykhaylenky and Others v. Ukraine, nos. 35091/02 and following, §§ 38-40, ECHR 2004-XII and Sychev v. Ukraine, no. 4773/02, §§ 42-46, 11 October 2005).