CtEDO 17.07.2025 Auto

CASE OF OPALENKO v. UKRAINE - [Ukrainian Translation] by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine

RESPONDENT
UKR
HOTĂRÂRE
17.07.2025
Pe scurt
Instanță
CtEDO
Concluzie
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;No violation of Article 6+6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Article 6-3 - Rights of defence;Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance) (Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance;Article 6 - Right to a fair trial);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
RĂSFOIEȘTE: CtEDO · 2025
DESCARCĂ: PDF · DOCX 🔒 Pro
Citează această cauză
CASE OF OPALENKO v. UKRAINE - [Ukrainian Translation] by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine (CtEDO, 2025)
HUDOC · oficial

Rezistarea inadmisibilă (Art. 35) Criterii de admisibilitate;(Art. 35-3-a) În mod evident nefondat;Nici o încălcare a articolului 6+6 - Dreptul la un proces echitabil (art. 6 - Proces penal;art. 6-1 - Audiere echitabilă;art. 6-3 - Drepturile de apărare;art. 6-3-c - Apărare prin asistență juridică) (art. 6-3-c - Apărare prin asistență juridică;art. 6 - Dreptul la un proces echitabil);Violare a articolului 6 - Dreptul la un proces echitabil (art. 6 - Apărare prin intermediul asistenței judiciare);art. 6-3-c - Apărare prin intermediul asistenței judiciare (art. 41 - Prejudiciu material;Darocurile morale - atribuire (art. 41 - Prejudiciu moral)

§ Cauze similare

Grupate prin similitudine semantică

5 cauze
CtEDO 2025-07-17
1,00
CASE OF OPALENKO v. UKRAINE
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;No violation of Article 6+6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Article 6-3 - Rights of defence;Ar
CtEDO 2023-01-12
0,96
CASE OF OVCHARENKO AND KOLOS v. UKRAINE - [Ukrainian Translation] by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a
CtEDO 2023-01-12
0,96
CASE OF OVCHARENKO AND KOLOS v. UKRAINE
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a
CtEDO 2023-01-12
0,96
Ovcharenko and Kolos v. Ukraine
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a
CtEDO 2021-03-09
0,96
CASE OF EMINAĞAOĞLU v. TURKEY - [Ukrainian Translation] summary by the Supreme Court of Ukraine
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court;Tribunal established by law);Violation
Sursă