search

… In a complete system of legal remedies, she should be entitled to review by an and by of the acts that decided that her mandate as Advocate General had expired on account of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union, that her post had become vacant, and that a successor would be appointed to that post. …

… Nor can the contested letter be considered a preparatory act in the procedure leading to the nomination of a successor to her post, in so far as such a nomination does not fall within the competence of the Court of Justice of the European Union, but of the Member States. 25 As regards the arguments concerning the lack of jurisdiction on the part of the General Court to review the legality of the declaration of 29 January 2020, the applicant maintains that it follows from well- case- …

… The relevant part of Article 6 § 1 provides: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by ...”. Admissibility Lack of victim status of the applicant and applicability of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention to the present case 49.   …

… The relevant part of Article 6 § 1 reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Admissibility 23.  The Court notes that this complaint is neither manifestly ill-founded nor inadmissible on any other grounds listed in Article 35 of the Convention. It must therefore be declared admissible. Merits 24.   …

… Where doubts exist as to the of the judge, the higher court may remit the case for a fresh examination to a different judicial formation of the relevant lower court. THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 22.  The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that Judge A., when considering his case in the appellate court proceedings, had been biased. …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . ... 3.  Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: ... …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by ... 2.  Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.” Admissibility Applicability ratione materiae (a)   Article 6 § 1 of the Convention 93.   …

… THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 §§ 1 AND 2 OF THE CONVENTION 92.  The applicant complained that she had not received a fair hearing by an and in the disciplinary proceedings against her because of the political and media involvement in the case. She relied on Article 6 §§ 1 and 2 of the Convention, the relevant parts of which read: “1.   …

… ., everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing ... by an and by .” Admissibility 38.   …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . …

… In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . ... 3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: ... …

… The provision in question reads, in so far as relevant, as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Admissibility 21.  The Court notes that the application is neither manifestly ill-founded nor inadmissible on any other grounds listed in Article 35 of the Convention. It must therefore be declared admissible. …

… They thus considered that they had not had a fair trial before an as provided in Article 6 of the Convention, which reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Admissibility 58.   …

… The applicants complained that the Constitutional Court was not , it having been composed of the same three judges who delivered the judgment of 29 November 2013 and who also rejected their request for a constitutional reference. …