Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 26488/18 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2024,5404) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
JANKAUSKAS v. LITHUANIA
Inadmissible (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
JANKAUSKAS v. LITHUANIA
Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 31.01.1986 - 8734/79
BARTHOLD v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50)
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 26488/18
The requisite balance between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual's fundamental rights will be upset if the person concerned has had to bear "an individual and excessive burden" (see, in particular, James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 50, Series A no. 98). - EGMR, 23.11.2021 - 36098/19
TARVYDAS v. LITHUANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 26488/18
The Court reiterates the fundamental principle that it is for the national authorities, particularly the courts, to interpret domestic law (see Tarvydas v. Lithuania, no. 36098/19, § 48, 23 November 2021). - EGMR, 12.06.2018 - 70520/10
BEINAROVIC AND OTHERS v. LITHUANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 26488/18
70520/10 and 2 others, §§ 138-42, 12 June 2018). - EGMR, 15.03.2022 - 81624/17
POVILONIS v. LITHUANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 26488/18
The annulment of the title was in accordance with the public interest, since it involved bringing the ownership of the property into conformity with the domestic legislation on the ownership of a constructed item (namely the road) which fell within the seaside belt zone and which could be used by others (see paragraph 9 above; compare also, mutatis mutandis, Povilonis v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 81624/17, § 28, 15 March 2022). - EGMR, 21.09.2021 - 73105/12
BERZINS AND OTHERS v. LATVIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 26488/18
All the above leads the Court to conclude that the correction of errors by the annulment of the applicant's title to the road in question has not created disproportionate new wrongs (compare and contrast Beinarovic and Others, cited above, § 145, and Berzi?†?. and Others v. Latvia, no. 73105/12, § 107, 21 September 2021).