search

… 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. …

… In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by . ... 3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: ... (d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him[.]” 7. …

… The applicants complained principally of the lack of of the in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. Mr Gerbst (application no. 13782/20) also complained that he had been unable to confront the police officers who had recorded his arrest. The applicants relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 of the Convention, which 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 .” 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. …

… 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. …