CtEDO 08.01.2013 AI

CASE OF BUCUR AND TOMA v. ROMANIA - [Romanian Translation] by the SCM Romania and IER

RESPONDENT
ROU
HOTĂRÂRE
08.01.2013
Pe scurt
Instanță
CtEDO
Concluzie
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;Violation of Article 38 - Examination of the case-{general} (Article 38 - Obligation to furnish all necessary facilities);Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-{general} (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);Violation of Article 13+8 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life;Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed;Non-pecuniary damage - award
RĂSFOIEȘTE: CtEDO · 2013
DESCARCĂ: PDF · DOCX 🔒 Pro
Citează această cauză
CASE OF BUCUR AND TOMA v. ROMANIA - [Romanian Translation] by the SCM Romania and IER (CtEDO, 2013)
HUDOC · oficial

Restul inadmisibil (Art. 35) Criterii de admisibilitate; Încălcarea articolului 38 - Examinarea cauzei-{general} (Articolul 38 - Obligația de a furniza toate facilități necesare); Încălcarea articolului 10 - Libertatea de exprimare-{general} (Articolul 10-1 - Libertatea de exprimare); Încălcarea articolului 6 - Dreptul la un proces echitabil (Articolul 6 - Procesul penal; Articolul 6-1 - Audiență echitabilă); Încălcarea articolului 8 - Dreptul la respectarea vieții private și familiale (Articolul 8-1 - Respectarea vieții private); Încălcarea articolului 13+8 - Dreptul la un recurs efectiv (Articolul 13 - Recurs efectiv) (Articolul 8-1 - Respectarea vieții private; Articolul 8 - Dreptul la respectarea vieții private și familiale); Daune patrimoniale - cerere respinsă; Daune morale - acordare

§ Cauze similare

Grupate prin similitudine semantică

5 cauze
CtEDO 2013-01-08
0,99
CASE OF BUCUR AND TOMA v. ROMANIA
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;Violation of Article 38 - Examination of the case-{general} (Article 38 - Obligation to furnish all necessary facilities);Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-{general} (Art
CtEDO 2013-01-08
0,97
Bucur and Toma v. Romania
Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 38 - Examination of the case and friendly settlement proceedings;Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -{General} (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression);Violation of Article 6 - Right to
CtEDO 2017-02-28
0,95
CASE OF BIVOLARU v. ROMANIA - [Romanian translation] by the SCM Romania and IER
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention;Article 5-1-c - Reasonable suspicion);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and
CtEDO 2014-09-17
0,95
CASE OF MOCANU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA - [Romanian translation] by the SCM Romania and IER
Preliminary objections dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Six-month period;Article 35-3-a - Continuing situation);Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (
CtEDO 2021-06-01
0,95
CASE OF ASSOCIATION ACCEPT AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA - [Romanian Translation] by the European Institute of Romania
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione personae;Violation of Article 14+8 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 14 - Discriminatio
Sursă