Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

CASE OF ŠTULÍŘ v. THE CZECH REPUBLICJOINT DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES LAZAROVA TRAJKOVSKA AND BIANKU

Doc ref:ECHR ID:

Document date: January 12, 2017

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

CASE OF ŠTULÍŘ v. THE CZECH REPUBLICJOINT DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES LAZAROVA TRAJKOVSKA AND BIANKU

Doc ref:ECHR ID:

Document date: January 12, 2017

Cited paragraphs only

JOINT DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES LAZAROVA TRAJKOVSKA AND BIANKU

We submit that the same reasons that made us dissent in the case of Bátěk and Others v. the Czech Republic (no. 54146/09), decided on the same date as the present case, are the basis for our dissent from the majority in this case as well.

A fortiori , in the present case the witness C. was based in London and it could not be said that the difficulties involved in locating her were of the same nature as those related to locating the truck drivers in the case of Bátěk and Others . However, just as in Bátěk and Others , the national authorities applied the standard that as long as the witness is abroad, it is impossible for his or her statements to be reproduced at the trial. When you think that this dismissive attitude takes place in relation to witnesses residing in another member State of the European Union, within which judicial cooperation should be effective, we believe that our concerns are very much justified.

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846