projetos

Perpetuatio fori and Article 6 §1: no inadmissibility issue

150001883Prática Administrativa Federal (VPB)2 de dez. de 1992Inadmissible

Abrir fonte

Extraído pela Omnilex

Resumo Omnilex

Peter Kübli brought Application No. 17495/90 against Switzerland before the European Commission of Human Rights. He complained under Article 6 §1 ECHR that the continued substantive jurisdiction of the court after the defendant company had been deleted from the commercial register violated the guarantee of a tribunal established by law. The Commission declared the application inadmissible, holding that the application of perpetuatio fori in these circumstances did not disclose a Convention breach.

Sumário Omnilex

Art. 6 § 1 ECHR; tribunal established by law; perpetuatio fori and substantive jurisdiction after deletion of a defendant company from the commercial register. The continuation of jurisdiction after proceedings have been validly commenced does not, as such, violate the requirement of a tribunal established by law. The principle of perpetuatio fori may lawfully preserve jurisdiction notwithstanding a subsequent change affecting the defendant’s registration status, provided the court seized initially remained competent when proceedings were opened (cf. consid. not specified). Such an objection does not, without more, raise an arguable Convention issue and may therefore be declared inadmissible.

Texto completo

JAAC 57.65

Déc. rendue en anglais par la Comm. eur. DH le 2 décembre 1992, déclarant irrecevable la req. Nº 17495/90, Peter Kübli c / Suisse

Art. 6 § 1 CEDH. Garantie d'un tribunal établi par la loi.

Aucune violation du fait de l'application du principe de la perpetuatio fori à la compétence sur le fond (radiation, au registre du commerce, d'une raison de commerce défenderesse après ouverture de l'instance).

Art. 6 § 1 EMRK. Garantie des auf Gesetz beruhenden Gerichts.

Keine Verletzung durch Anwendung des Grundsatzes der perpetuatio fori für die sachliche Zuständigkeit (Löschung einer beklagten Firma im Handelsregister nach Beginn der Rechtshängigkeit).

Art. 6 § 1 CEDU. Garanzia di un tribunale costituito per legge.

Nessuna violazione dovuta all'applicazione del principio della perpetuatio fori alla competenza oggettiva (radiazione dal registro di commercio di una ditta convenuta dopo l'apertura dell'istanza).

Cette décision a été rendue en anglais. Le texte peut être:

· commandé par courrier au Greffe de la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme, Conseil de l'Europe, B.P. 431 R 6, F - 67075 Strasbourg Cedex.

· ou consulté sur Internet à l'adresse http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/ à l'aide d'une recherche dans HUDOC avec le nº de la req. et le type de texte (Arrêt ou Décision sur la recevabilité)

1

Schweizerisches Bundesarchiv, Digitale Amtsdruckschriften Archives fédérales suisses, Publications officielles numérisées Archivio federale svizzero, Pubblicazioni ufficiali digitali

JAAC 57.65 - Dec. rendue en anglais par la Comm. eur. DH le 2 décembre 1992, déclarant irrecevable la req. Nº 17495/90, Peter Kübli c / Suisse

In

Verwaltungspraxis der Bundesbehörden

Dans In

Jurisprudence des autorités administratives de la Confédération Giurisprudenza delle autorità amministrative della Confederazione

Jahr Année

1993

Anno

57

Band Volume

Volume

Seite Page

Pagina

Ref. No

150 001 883

Das Dokument wurde durch das Schweizerische Bundesarchiv und die Bundeskanzlei konvertiert. Le document a été digitalisé par les Archives Fédérales Suisses et la Chancellerie fédérale. Il documento è stato convertito dall'Archivio federale svizzero e della Cancelleria federale.

Palavras-chave

right to a tribunal established by lawinadmissibilitycommercial registerjurisdictionperpetuatio fori

Extraído pela Omnilex

Questões jurídicas principais extraídas pela Omnilex

Questão jurídica principal

Whether the application under Article 6 §1 ECHR was inadmissible despite the application of perpetuatio fori after the defendant company was deleted from the commercial register.

Decisão extraída

The Commission found no arguable violation of the right to a tribunal established by law; applying perpetuatio fori to substantive jurisdiction after the opening of proceedings did not breach Article 6 §1.

Fundamentação extraída

The continuation of jurisdiction after the defendant’s deletion from the commercial register did not deprive the applicant of a tribunal established by law or otherwise disclose a Convention issue.

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.