search

… Examining whether the CAS could be regarded as an ‘ and by ’ within the meaning of that provision, the ECtHR held that the CAS had the appearance of a by and that it was genuinely and (Mutu and Pechstein, cited above, §§ 149 and 159), which it has had cause recently to confirm (Platini v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 526/18, § 65, 11 February 2020). 5.1.3. …

… Default interest OPERATIVE PROVISIONS PARTLY CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE ŠIMÁČKOVÁ A “ by ”? An “ and ” ? Conclusion PARTLY DISSENTING JOINT OPINION OF JUDGES BOŠNJAK, ZÜND, ŠIMÁČKOVÁ ET DERENČINOVIĆ PARTLY DISSENTING JOINT OPINION OF JUDGES EICKE AND KUCSKO-STADLMAYER INTRODUCTION JURISDICTION MERITS OF THE ARTICLE 6 § 1 COMPLAINT POSTSCRIPT In the case of Semenya v. …

… That case- has since been confirmed many times ... In its judgment in Mutu and Pechstein (cited above), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) was also called upon to rule on the and of the CAS. …

… This was contrary to the guarantees of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the relevant part of 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 24. …

… THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 23. The applicants complained that their right to an had been violated on account of the participation of judge K.K. in the cassation proceedings against them. …

… The applicants complained that the Family Court in the civil proceedings (composed of Judge F) had not been due to the links of the judge with the opposing party’s lawyer, moreover, the judge had herself decided on the challenge lodged against her, contrary to that provided in Article 6 § 1 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 .” …

… THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 31. …

… ., everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by .” Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention reads as follows: “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law. …

… It further complained of a lack of on the part of the High Administrative Court (appeal panel) judges on account of their alleged involvement in transactions with the property of Greek Cypriots. The relevant part of Articles 6 and 13 provide: Article 6 “1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by . ...” …

… The applicant relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which, in its relevant part, reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Admissibility Applicability of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in the context of the judgment of the Constitutional Court of 10 March 2022 in case no. K 7/21 (a) The parties’ submissions 42. …

… The relevant part of Article 6 § 1 reads: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Admissibility 60. The Government conceded that Article 6 § 1 under its criminal limb was applicable in the present case. They submitted, however, that the administrative-offence proceedings in question had had very little impact on the applicant’s professional or private life. …

… The activities of the [National Police of Ukraine] shall be directed and coordinated by the Cabinet of Ministers ... through the Minister of the Interior ... in accordance with the .” THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 59. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the administrative-offence proceedings against him had been unfair and that the trial court had not been . …

… 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. ...” 49. The Government contested that argument. Admissibility Applicability of Article 6 § 2 (a) General principles 50. …

… by an and previously by . 101. …

… By calling into question the Court’s jurisdiction deriving from Article 279 TFEU to order interim measures intended to preserve the right to effective judicial protection before an and by , the Trybunał Konstytucyjny (Constitutional Court) undermines the right to effective judicial protection. …

… (Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court - Appointment). (18) According to that interpretation, verification of the of the procedure for the appointment of a judge to the Extraordinary Chamber of the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court) forms an integral part of the requirement of an ‘ and by ’, as imposed by EU law. …

… According to the case-[1], with the exception of isolated instances[2], when the Court finds a violation of Article 6 on the grounds that there was no or “”, it considers it unnecessary to address any other complaint under Article 6 of the Convention. This is due to the fundamental importance that the Court attaches to the institutional guarantees in Article 6 § 1. …

… In the determination 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 43. 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. …

… The reason for writing this concurring opinion is to explain the rationale behind my position in finding that there has been a breach of both the Article 6 § 1 guarantee regarding the of the trial court and the Article 6 § 2 guarantee concerning the presumption of innocence, instead of considering it sufficient to find only one violation on the ground that there was no “”. 2. …