search

… They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 7. The relevant principles of the Court’s case-law concerning the requirement of impartiality under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention can be found in the leading case of Karelin v. Russia (no. 926/08, §§ 51-57, 20 September 2016, with further references). …

… THE JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 of the Convention 6. The applicants complained principally of the lack of of the in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative‑offence proceedings. …

… 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 ...” Applicability of Article 6 99. The Government conceded that Article 6 § 1 of the Convention was applicable under its civil head to the vetting proceedings. …

… She argued that her case had not been determined by a “ by ” owing to the ineligibility of one or more members of the SAC, that the SAC adjudicating her case had lacked and and that serious procedural shortcomings had affected the fairness of the proceedings. She relied on Article 6 of the Convention, the relevant part of which reads as follows: “1. …

… The Court further considers that the information requests filed and the disciplinary proceedings requested by the applicant against the judges concerned after the termination of the vetting proceedings against her by a final decision were not an effective remedy to ensure that her case would be decided by a “ by ”. 113. …

… THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE CONVENTION 58. The applicant complained of a violation of Article 6 of the Convention, the relevant part of which reads as follows: “1. 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 ...” The parties’ submissions The applicant (a) Applicability of Article 6 59. …

… Albania, no. 15227/19, § 235, 9 February 2021), and stated that the vetting bodies performed a judicial function and were “” within the meaning of that Article. (b) and 60. The applicant contested the independence and impartiality of the vetting bodies, both as a whole and specifically in relation to the panels in her case. …

… Legal context International 3 Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, signed at Rome on 4 November 1950 (‘the ECHR’), which is entitled ‘Right to a fair trial’, provides: ‘1. 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. …

… They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article 6 § 1 “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 7. The relevant principles of the Court’s case-law concerning the requirement of impartiality under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention can be found in the leading case of Karelin v. …

… THE JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 of the Convention 6. The applicants complained of the lack of of the in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. …

… 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 ...” Admissibility 26. 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 The parties’ submissions (a) The applicant 27. …

… THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION AS REGARDS THE APPLICANT’S ACCESS TO A COURT 25. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant asserted that he had been denied a fair trial, as the domestic courts had dismissed his applications for compensation. Article 6 § 1, in so far as relevant, reads as follows: “1. …

… They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article 6 § 1 “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 7. The relevant principles of the Court’s case-law concerning the requirement of impartiality under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention can be found in the leading case of Karelin v. …

… THE JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 of the Convention 6. The applicants complained of the lack of of the in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. …

… They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article 6 § 1 “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by ” 8. The relevant principles of the Court’s case-law concerning the requirement of impartiality under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention can be found in the leading case of Karelin v. …

… THE JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 6. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 of the Convention 7. The applicants complained of the lack of of the in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. …

… They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article 6 § 1 “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 7. The relevant principles of the Court’s case-law concerning the requirement of impartiality under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention can be found in the leading case of Karelin v. …

… THE JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 of the Convention 6. The applicants complained of the lack of of the in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. …

… They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article 6 § 1 “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 7. The relevant principles of the Court’s case-law concerning the requirement of impartiality under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention can be found in the leading case of Karelin v. …

… THE JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 of the Convention 6. The applicants complained of the lack of of the in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. …