Source: http://echr.ketse.com/doc/73797.01-en-20051215/
Timestamp: 2017-11-23 22:02:23
Document Index: 633275752

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 6', 'Art. 10', 'art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 10', 'Art. 10', '§ 27', '§ 146', '§ 27', '§ 58', '§ 20', '§ 67', '§ 68', '§ 45', '§ 37', '§ 70', '§ 85', '§ 88', '§ 35', '§ 25', '§ 33', '§ 52', '§ 41', '§ 82', '§ 58', '§ 30', '§ 78', '§ 69', '§ 47', '§ 30', '§ 41', '§ 118', '§ 58', '§ 63', '§ 42', '§ 27', '§ 27', '§ 30', '§ 32', '§ 105', '§ 29', '§ 41', '§ 95', '§ 37', '§ 45', '§ 62', '§ 69', '§ 40', '§ 51', 'Art. 10', 'Art. 10', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6']

Articles 10-1; 10-2; 41; 6-1; 6-2; 6-3-a
Not necessary to examine Art. 6-3-a
Preliminary objection regarding Art. 10 dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies)
(art. 6-1) necessary in a democratic society
Represented by TRIANTAFYLLIDES M. ; CLERIDES C. ; EFSTATHIOU E. ; ANGELIDES A. ; VRAHIMI E. ; CLERIDES L. ; EMMERSON B.; MULLER M.
Conclusion Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Not necessary to examine Art. 6-2 ; Not necessary to examine Art. 6-3-a ; Preliminary objection regarding Art. 10 dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) ; Violation of Art. 10 ; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic and Convention proceedings
Articles 6-1 , 6-2 , 6-3-a , 10-1 , 10-2 , 41
Law at Issue Constitution, Articles 12, 30, 113 and 162 ; Courts of Justice Law 1960, sections 25 and 44 ; Criminal Procedure Law, sections 145-146 and 174 ; Advocates Law, sections 15 and 17 ; Prison Law, section 9
Strasbourg Case Law Amihalachioaie v. Moldova, no. 60115/00, § 27, ECHR 2004-III ; ; Assenov and Others v. Bulgaria, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, pp. 3298-3299, §§ 146-150 ; Barfod v. Denmark, judgment of 22 February 1989, Series A no. 149 ; Beyeler v. Italy (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 33202/96, § 27, 28 May 2002 ; Bladet Troms? and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 58, ECHR 1999-III ; Brincat v. Italy, judgment of 26 November 1992, Series A no. 249-A, pp. 11-12, §§ 20-22 ; Buscemi v. Italy, no. 29569/95, § 67 and § 68, ECHR 1999-VI ; Castillo Algar v. Spain, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, p. 3116, § 45 ; Ceylan v. Turkey [GC], no. 23556/94, § 37, ECHR 1999-IV ; Chauvy and Others v. France, no. 64915/01, § 70, ECHR 2004-VI ; Cumpana and Mazare v. Romania [GC], no. 33348/96, § 85 and § 88, ECHR 2004-XI ; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, §§ 35-38, ECHR 2000-X ; De Cubber v. Belgium, judgment of 26 October 1984, Series A no. 86, § 25, and p. 14, § 33 ; De Haan v. the Netherlands, judgment of 26 August 1997, Reports 1997-IV, p. 1379, §§ 52-55 ; Demicoli v. Malta, judgment of 27 August 1991, Series A no. 210, p. 18-19, §§ 41-42 ; Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, judgment of 8 June 1976, Series A no. 22, pp. 34-35, §§ 82-83 ; Ferrantelli and Santangelo v. Italy, judgment of 7 August 1996, Reports 1996-III, pp. 951-952, § 58 ; Fey v. Austria du 24 February 1993, Series A no. 255-A, p. 12, § 30 ; Findlay v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 February 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-I, p. 263, §§ 78-79 ; Grieves v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 57067/00, § 69, ECHR 2003-XIII ; Hauschildt v. Denmark, judgment of 24 May 1989, Series A no. 154, p. 21, § 47 ; Holm v. Sweden, judgment of 25 November 1993, Series A no. 279-A, p. 14, § 30 ; Huber v. Switzerland, judgment of 23 October 1990, Series A no. 188, pp. 17-18, §§ 41-43 ; Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, §§ 118-119, 28 November 2002 ; Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium, judgment of 23 June 1981, Series A no. 43, p. 25, § 58 ; Lešník v. Slovakia, no. 35640/97, §§ 63-64, ECHR 2003-IV ; Miller and Others v. the United Kingdom, nos 45825/99, 45826/99 and 45827/99, 26 October 2004 ; Morel v. France, no. 34130/96, § 42, ECHR 2000-VI ; Nikula v. Finland, no. 31611/96, §§ 27-28, 45, 46, 49, and 54-55, ECHR 2002-II ; Padovani v. Italy, judgment of 26 February 1993, Series A no. 257-B, p. 20, § 27 ; Piersack v. Belgium, judgment of 1er October 1982, Series A no. 53, § 30 ; Pullar v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 10 June 1996, Reports 1996-III, p. 793, § 32 ; Ravnsborg v. Sweden, judgment of 23 March 1994, Series A no. 283-B ; Sahin v. Germany [GC], no. 30943/96, § 105, ECHR 2003-VIII ; Schöpfer v. Switzerland, judgment of 20 May 1998, pp. 1052-1053, §§ 29-30, Reports 1998-III ; Skalka v. Poland, no. 43425/98, 27 May 2003, §§ 41-42 ; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-... ; Steur v. the Netherlands, no. 39657/98, §§ 37 and 44, ECHR 2003-XI ; Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no 1), judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 29, § 45, and p. 38, § 62 ; Tammer v. Estonia, no. 41205/98, § 69, ECHR 2001-I ; Wettstein v. Switzerland, no. 33958/96, ECHR 2000-XII ; Worm v. Austria, judgment of 29 August 1997, Reports 1997-V, § 40 ; Zana v. Turkey du 25 November 1997, Reports 1997-VII, pp. 2547-2548, § 51
External Sources Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (United Nations 1990) ; Recommendation (2000) 21 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe
Keywords "(Art. 10-1) FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION" "(Art. 10-2) MAINTAINING THE AUTHORITY AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY" "(Art. 6) CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS" "(Art. 6-1) IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL" "(Art. 6-1) NECESSARY IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY" "(Art. 6-2) PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE" "(Art. 6-3-a) INFORMATION IN DETAIL" "(Art. 6-3-a) INFORMATION ON NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION"
DE HAAN v. THE NETHERLANDS