En se référant à la jurisprudence de la Cour dans l'affaire König, le requérant estime que la décision de suspension du droit d'exercer la profession médicale constituait une décision sur un "droit

être directement déterminante pour le droit en question, l'article 6 § 1 ne se contentant pas, pour entrer en jeu, «   d'un lien ténu ni de répercussions lointaines   » (voir, parmi d'autres, König

Court HR, König v. Germany judgment of 28 June 1978, Series A no. 27, p. 33, para. 98).   38.

September 2003 when the Regional Land Reform Board dismissed the applicants’ partition request, as it was at that moment that a “dispute” arose within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see König

  Autriche (article 50), 7 mai 1974, § 43, série A n o 17, König c. Allemagne (article 50), 10 mars 1980, § 20, série A n o 36, Scordino c.

Court H.R., König judgment of 28 June 1978, Series A no. 27, p. 33, para. 98).

However, this decision must be reasonable having regard to the special circumstances of the case (see mutatis mutandis König   v.

continuer à pratiquer la médecine à titre libéral, donne lieu à des «   contestations sur des droits (...) de caractère civil   » au sens de l’article 6 §   1 (voir notamment les arrêts König

  Le Gouvernement renvoie ici aux arrêts rendus par la Cour dans les affaires Ringeisen, König, Le Compte et autres, et Sramek.

Transactions Commission refused the buyer's request to authorise the real-property transaction, as it was from that moment that a “dispute” arose within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see König

proceedings which of necessity bore on facts and interests of a pre-eminently personal nature -, the presence of the applicants was capable of being of value, before both the Court and the Commission (see the König

    The applicants in this case are Ms Sonja Gabelić-Špicer, Mr   Goran   Miletić, Mr Darko Köning, Mr Slobodan Stojanović, Ms   Jovanka   Todorović-Savović and Mr Adam Puškar

A plusieurs reprises la Cour a estimé que seul compte le caractère du droit qui se trouve en cause (voir notamment l’arrêt König c.

D.H. arrêt König du 28 juin 1978, Série A N° 27 pp. 31-32, par. 92-94 ; arrêt Le Compte, Van Leuven et De Meyere du 23 juin 1981, Série A n° 43, p. 22, par. 48 et arrêt Albert et Le Compte du 10 février

has consistently held, it might be reasonable for national courts to await under certain circumstances the outcome of parallel proceedings as a measure of procedural efficiency (see, mutatis mutandis, König

since she could not seize the District Court before receiving an instruction within the meaning of chapter 4, section 10 of the Execution Act, as in force at the relevant time ( mutatis mutandis , see König

The term “right” must nevertheless be given an autonomous interpretation under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, inter alia , König v. Germany , judgment of 28 June 1986, Series A no. 27, pp.

Court HR, König v. Germany judgment of 28 June 1978, Series A no. 27, p. 22, para. 61, and p. 23, para. 64; No. 8499/79, Dec. 7.1080, D.R. 21, p. 176).

    The Court finds that compensation for costs incurred in the domestic proceedings may only be granted in so far as they were necessary in trying to prevent the violation found (see the König

’s case-law in comparable cases, it found in essence that, whilst the profession of pharmacist in Austria had certain public-law features, the private-law aspects prevailed (see mutatis mutandis the König