Source: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Text=37346/05
Timestamp: 2019-07-16 23:50:45
Document Index: 95765852

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 35', 'Art. 35', 'Art. 35', 'Art. 35', 'Art. 41', 'Art. 46', 'Art. 46', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 6', '§ 130', '§ 128', '§ 95', '§ 3', '§ 75', '§ 70', '§ 34', '§ 82', '§ 73', '§ 142', '§ 43', '§ 84', '§ 84', '§ 43', '§ 69', '§ 43', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 1']

Rechtsprechung: 37346/05 - dejure.org
Weitere Entscheidungen unten: EGMR, 24.09.2015 | EGMR, 23.02.2010 | EGMR
https://dejure.org/2011,56077
EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 37346/05 (https://dejure.org/2011,56077)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 10.05.2011 - 37346/05 (https://dejure.org/2011,56077)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 10. Mai 2011 - 37346/05 (https://dejure.org/2011,56077)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,56077) 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. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 35 Abs. 3, Art. 35 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 41, Art. 46, Art. 46 Abs. 2 MRK
Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Violation of Art. 13 Violation of Art. 6-1 Respondent State to take measures of a general character Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)
EGMR, 23.02.2010 - 37346/05
Taking into account the recurrent and persistent nature of the problem, the large number of people it has affected or is capable of affecting, and the urgent need to grant them speedy and appropriate redress at the domestic level, the Court considers it appropriate to apply the pilot-judgment procedure in the present case (see Burdov (no. 2), cited above, § 130, and Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, § 128, 10 May 2011).
The question whether any individual domestic authority is at fault for this state of affairs is immaterial, because what is at issue in proceedings before the Court is the responsibility of the State under international law, not that of individual domestic authorities or officials (see, mutatis mutandis, Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, §§ 95-96, 10 May 2011).
The Court has stated that an application raising the issue of a potential systemic problem of unreasonable length of civil proceedings and an alleged lack of effective remedies in that regard should not be rejected under the new admissibility requirement set out by Article 35 § 3 (b) of the Convention (see, among others, Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, §§ 75-77, 10 May 2011).
The severity of a violation should be assessed by taking into account both the applicant's subjective perceptions and what is objectively at stake in a particular case (see Korolev v. Russia (dec.), no. 25551/05, ECHR 2010; Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, § 70, 10 May 2011; and Eon v. France, no. 26118/10, § 34, 14 March 2013).
The purpose of that rule, qualified by the drafters as a "second safeguard clause" (see the Explanatory report, § 82), is to ensure that every case receives a judicial examination, either at the national or at the European level, so as to avoid a denial of justice (see Korolev, cited above; and Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, § 73, 10 May 2011).
In the present case, the Court notes that the hourly rate charged by the applicants" lawyers is comparable to those charged in recent cases against Bulgaria having a similar complexity (see, as recent authority, Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, § 142, 10 May 2011 with further references therein).
The relevant domestic law and practice on remedies aimed at accelerating civil proceedings have been summarised in the Court's judgment in the case of Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, §§ 43 and 55, 10 May 2011.
EGMR, 21.02.2012 - 44184/05
NIKOLOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
The relevant provisions in respect of remedies for delays in civil proceedings have been summarised in paragraphs 35-55 in the Court's judgment in the case of Finger v. Bulgaria (no. 37346/05, 10 May 2011).
Moreover, the Government have not adduced any elements of domestic case-law to demonstrate that the remedy suggested is capable of substantially accelerating the proceedings (see also Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, §§ 84 to 91, 10 May 2011; Vukelic v. Montenegro, no. 58258/09, §§ 84 to 88, 4 June 2013).
The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Bulgaria, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-....; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007 and Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, 10 May 2011).
The relevant domestic law concerning the complaint about delays under Article 217a of the 1952 Code of Civil Procedure is set out in the Court's judgment in the case of Finger v. Bulgaria, no. 37346/05, § 43, 10 May 2011.
EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 7456/06
TERZIEVA AND AVRAMOVA v. BULGARIA
EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 55521/07
HRISAFOVA-VANTSOVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
https://dejure.org/2010,64692
EGMR, 23.02.2010 - 37346/05 (https://dejure.org/2010,64692)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 23.02.2010 - 37346/05 (https://dejure.org/2010,64692)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 23. Februar 2010 - 37346/05 (https://dejure.org/2010,64692)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2010,64692) 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, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
https://dejure.org/9999,84861
EGMR - 37346/05 (https://dejure.org/9999,84861)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/9999,84861) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
EGMR - 37346/05 (anhängig)