Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  THE NATIONAL UNION OF RAIL, MARITIME AND TRANSPORT WORKERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 11 Abs. 2, Art. 35 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible No violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of association) (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  THE NATIONAL UNION OF RAIL, MARITIME AND TRANSPORT WORKERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  [DEU] Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of association)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse (2)

• verfassungsblog.de (Kurzinformation)

  Arbeitskampfrecht: Karlsruhe und Straßburg wollen sich nicht einmischen

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  R.M.T. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (21)Neu Zitiert selbst (17)

• EGMR, 22.04.2013 - 48876/08

  Verbot politischer Fernsehwerbung

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  As it has recently recalled, a State may, consistently with the Convention, adopt general legislative measures applying to pre-defined situations without providing for individualised assessments with regard to the individual, necessarily differing and perhaps complex circumstances of each single case governed by the legislation (see Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 48876/08, § 107, 22 April 2013, with many further references concerning different provisions of the Convention and Protocol No. 1).

  This is true in particular where such measures affect fundamental civil and political rights, such as freedom of expression, the supervision over the protection of these rights having been the very purpose of the Court's creation (see the dissenting opinion of Judges Ziemele, Sajó, Kalaydjieva, Vucinic and De Gaetano in Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 48876/08, ECHR 2013).

• EuGH, 18.12.2007 - C-341/05

  Freier Dienstleistungsverkehr - Zur Vereinbarkeit einer kollektiven Maßnahme mit …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  Furthermore, under this case-law, trade unions may be held liable for strikes which interfere with the fundamental freedoms protected by European Union law (see, in particular, the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 11 December 2007 in Case C-438/05, International Transport Workers" Federation and Finnish Seamen's Union v Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Esti; and its judgment of 18 December 2007 in Case C-341/05, Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet, Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundets avdelning 1, Byggettan and Svenska Elektrikerförbundet).
• EGMR, 15.09.2009 - 30946/04

  KAYA ET SEYHAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  The Court should instead take a stringent approach as it had done in two cases involving sanctions against public-sector employees who participated in a one-day strike (Karaçay v. Turkey, no. 6615/03, 27 March 2007 and Kaya and Seyhan v. Turkey, no. 30946/04, 15 September 2009).

 
• EGMR, 16.03.2010 - 42184/05

  CARSON ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  In the sphere of social and economic policy, which must be taken to include a country's industrial relations policy, the Court will generally respect the legislature's policy choice unless it is "manifestly without reasonable foundation" (Carson and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 42184/05, § 61, ECHR 2010).
• EGMR, 27.04.2010 - 20161/06

  VÖRDUR ÓLAFSSON c. ISLANDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  The domestic authorities" power of appreciation is not unlimited, however, but goes hand in hand with European supervision, it being the Court's task to give a final ruling on whether a particular restriction is reconcilable with freedom of association as protected by Article 11 (Vörður Ólafsson v. Iceland, no. 20161/06, § 76, ECHR 2010).
• EGMR, 13.11.2019 - 39401/04

  MGN LIMITED AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  Moreover, the Court has recognised the "special weight" to be accorded to the role of the domestic policy-maker in matters of general policy on which opinions within a democratic society may reasonably differ widely (see in the context of Article 10 of the Convention the case MGN Limited v. the United Kingdom, no. 39401/04, § 200, 18 January 2011, referring in turn to Hatton and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 36022/97, § 97, ECHR 2003-VIII, where the Court adverted to the "direct democratic legitimation" that the legislature enjoys).
• EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08

  Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  40660/08 and 60641/08, § 116, ECHR 2012; also Kart v. Turkey [GC], no. 8917/05, §§ 85-87, ECHR 2009 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 07.07.2011 - 37452/02

  STUMMER c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  In this regard the Court has usually allowed a wide margin of appreciation since, by virtue of their direct knowledge of their society and its needs, the national authorities, and in particular the democratically elected parliaments, are in principle better placed than the international judge to appreciate what is in the public interest on social or economic grounds and what are the legislative measures best suited for the conditions in their country in order to implement the chosen social, economic or industrial policy (see among many authorities Stummer v. Austria [GC], no. 37452/02, § 89, ECHR 2011).
• EGMR, 21.05.2013 - 59253/11

  POA AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  That has not occurred in the present case (contrast with POA and Others v. United Kingdom (dec.), no. 59253/11, 21 May 2013, where the applicant trade union had already submitted an identical complaint to the Committee on Freedom of Association, which had issued its decision on the merits).
• EGMR, 21.04.2009 - 68959/01

  Streikverbot für Staatsdiener: Gewerkschaften sehen volles Streikrecht für Beamte …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 31045/10

  23018/04, 23034/04, 23042/04, 23071/04, 23073/04, 23081/04, 23086/04, 23091/04, 23094/04, 23444/04 and 23676/04, 17 July 2008; Enerji Yapı-Yol Sen v. Turkey, no. 68959/01, 21 April 2009).
• EGMR, 10.01.2002 - 53574/99

  UNISON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 07.04.2009 - 2096/05

  PERALDI c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 17.07.2008 - 23018/04

  URCAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  SØRENSEN ET RASMUSSEN c. DANEMARK
• EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 74611/01

  DILEK ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
• EKMR, 12.10.1992 - 16358/90

  CERECEDA MARTÍN ET AUTRES contre l'ESPAGNE
• EGMR, 21.02.2006 - 28602/95

  TÜM HABER SEN AND ÇINAR v. TURKEY

• BVerfG, 12.06.2018 - 2 BvR 1738/12

  Streikverbot für Beamte verfassungsgemäß

  Ein solches umfassendes Verständnis von Art. 9 Abs. 3 GG und das darin zum Ausdruck kommende Bemühen um die Gewährleistung eines möglichst weitreichenden Grundrechtsschutzes greift im Sinne einer völkerrechtsfreundlichen Auslegung zudem die Wertungen des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte zu Art. 11 EMRK auf, wonach auch der Unterstützungsstreik jedenfalls ein ergänzendes Element der Koalitionsfreiheit darstelle (vgl. EGMR, National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. United Kingdom, Urteil vom 8. April 2014, Nr. 31045/10, § 77).

  Allerdings betraf das Verfahren nicht die Gewährleistung eines Streikrechts, dessen Zugehörigkeit zu den Kerngewährleistungen des Art. 11 EMRK der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte bislang ausdrücklich nicht festgestellt hat (vgl. EGMR, National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. United Kingdom, Urteil vom 8. April 2014, Nr. 31045/10, § 84).

  Werde umgekehrt nicht der Kern, sondern nur ein Nebenaspekt der Gewerkschaftstätigkeit berührt, sei der Beurteilungsspielraum weiter und der jeweilige Eingriff eher verhältnismäßig (vgl. EGMR, National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. United Kingdom, Urteil vom 8. April 2014, Nr. 31045/10, § 87).

  Für einen Unterstützungsstreik hat der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte entschieden, dass dieser nicht den Kernbereich der Vereinigungsfreiheit betreffe, sondern lediglich einen Nebenaspekt darstelle und daher dem betroffenen Staat bei Einschränkungen ein weiterer Beurteilungsspielraum zuzugestehen sei (vgl. EGMR, National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. United Kingdom, Urteil vom 8. April 2014, Nr. 31045/10, § 88).

• EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 27510/08

  Leugnung des Völkermords an Armeniern von Meinungsfreiheit gedeckt

  It can thus only review whether or not the application of Article 261 bis § 4 of the Swiss Criminal Code in the case of the applicant was "necessary in a democratic society" within the meaning of Article 10 § 2 of the Convention (see National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, § 98, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 45487/17

  NORWEGIAN CONFEDERATION OF TRADE UNIONS (LO) AND NORWEGIAN TRANSPORT WORKERS' …

  The Court notes that in National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom (no. 31045/10, § 76, 8 April 2014), as regards the applicability of Article 11 to a sympathy strike, it held that it would be inconsistent with the method of interpretation outlined in Demir and Baykara, cited above, § 85, for it to adopt in relation to that provision an interpretation of the scope of freedom of association of trade unions that is much narrower than that which prevails in international law (see in relation to the latter paragraphs 70-73 above).

  The right to collective bargaining has not been interpreted as including a "right" to a collective agreement, nor does the right to strike imply a right to prevail (National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, judgment of 8 April 2014, § 85).

  In National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom (no. 31045/10, § 106, ECHR 2014), the Court emphasised, however, that the conclusion which it had reached in that case, in which it found that a ban on taking secondary industrial action against an employer not party to a labour dispute did not violate Article 11, should not be understood as calling into question the analysis effected on the basis of those standards and their purposes by the ILO Committee of Experts and the European Committee on Social Rights.

 
• EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 815/18

  Tarifeinheitsgesetz verstößt nicht gegen die EMRK

  Der Gerichtshof weist hinsichtlich der Verhältnismäßigkeit von Eingriffen in gewerkschaftliche Aktivitäten erneut darauf hin, dass der Umfang des Ermessensspielraums des Staates in die Gewerkschaftsfreiheit betreffenden Fällen von Art und Ausmaß der Einschränkung des betreffenden Gewerkschaftsrechts, dem mit der angegriffenen Einschränkung verfolgten Ziel und den widerstreitenden Rechten und Interessen anderer Mitglieder der Gesellschaft, die unter einer uneingeschränkten Ausübung dieses Rechts leiden würden, abhängig ist (siehe National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers./. das Vereinigte Königreich, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 31045/10, Rdnr. 86, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 37553/05

  KUDREVICIUS ET AUTRES c. LITUANIE

  Bearing in mind the margin of appreciation to be accorded to the respondent State in such circumstances (see paragraph 156 above; see also, by way of comparison, the wide discretion enjoyed by the Contracting States in respect of trade union action, National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, §§ 86-87, ECHR 2014), the latter was clearly entitled to consider that the interests of protecting public order outweighed those of the applicants in resorting to roadblocks as a means for the farmers to achieve a breakthrough in their negotiations with the Government (see, mutatis mutandis, Primov and Others, cited above, § 160).
• EGMR, 27.11.2014 - 36701/09

  HRVATSKI LIJECNICKI SINDIKAT v. CROATIA

  The Court, having regard to its case-law according to which strike action is protected under Article 11 of the Convention (see Enerji Yapı-Yol Sen v. Turkey, no. 68959/01, § 24, 21 April 2009, and National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, § 84, ECHR 2014), sees no reason to hold otherwise.

  The attempt of The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, § 84, 8 April 2014 to backtrack from the position of principle of Enerji YAPI-YOL SEN is not convincing, since the two above-mentioned expressions were used in the same paragraph of Enerji YAPI-YOL SEN and the second one was clearly intended to clarify the meaning of the first one.

• EGMR, 15.02.2024 - 19920/20

  SKOBERNE v. SLOVENIA

  The margin will tend to be more narrow where the right at stake is crucial to the individual's effective enjoyment of intimate or key rights or where the interference is far-reaching (see S. and Marper, cited above, § 102; also compare Dubská and Krejzová v. the Czech Republic [GC], nos. 28859/11 and 28473/12, § 178, 15 November 2016; Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, 22 October 1981, § 52, Series A no. 45; and National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, §§ 86-87, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 44873/09

  OGNEVENKO v. RUSSIA

  The Court has on several occasions held that strike action is protected by Article 11 (see National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, § 84, ECHR 2014, with further references).

  For example, in the case of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom (no. 31045/10, 8 April 2014, the "RMT" judgment), concerning the ban on secondary strike action, the Court found no violation because the ban was aimed at protecting the rights and freedoms of others potentially affected by the disruption, including the public.

• EGMR, 24.05.2016 - 38590/10

  BIAO c. DANEMARK

  Furthermore, the Court should be careful not to convert non-binding, policy-based recommendations into legally binding obligations (see also National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, §§ 92-99, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 15.10.2020 - 80982/12

  MUHAMMAD ET MUHAMMAD c. ROUMANIE

  [36] National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom, no. 31045/10, § 87, ECHR 2014, and Tek Gida Is Sendikasi v. Turkey, no. 35009/05, § 36, 4 April 2017.
• EGMR, 19.05.2022 - 54032/18

  T.C. v. ITALY
• EGMR, 02.06.2022 - 59402/14

  STRAUME v. LATVIA
• EGMR, 04.04.2017 - 35009/05

  TEK GIDA IS SENDIKASI c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 77587/12

  V.C.L. AND A.N. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 21.04.2015 - 45892/09

  JUNTA RECTORA DEL ERTZAINEN NAZIONAL ELKARTASUNA (ER.N.E.) c. ESPAGNE
• EGMR, 02.10.2014 - 48408/12

  VENIAMIN TYMOSHENKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 02.10.2014 - 10609/10

  MATELLY c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 02.02.2021 - 22457/16

  X ET AUTRES c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 03.05.2016 - 65397/13

  UNITE THE UNION v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR - 33144/21 (anhängig)

  TRADE UNION OF SOCIAL SECTOR WORKERS AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
• EGMR, 08.09.2015 - 15557/10

  TRADE UNION IN THE FACTORY '4TH NOVEMBER' v.