Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  JOVANOVIC contre la CROATIE

  Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  JOVANOVIC v. CROATIA

  Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (14)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 26.09.1995 - 17851/91

  Radikalenerlaß

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.02.2002 - 59109/00

  Furthermore, the conditions for access to civil service were tightened due to the specific circumstances, which distinguishes the present case from the cases of Vogt v. Germany and Wille v. Liechtenstein (see the Vogt v. Germany judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 323 and the Wille v. Liechtenstein judgment of 28 October 1999, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1999-VII).
• EGMR, 28.08.1986 - 9228/80

  GLASENAPP c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.02.2002 - 59109/00

  In this respect they rely on the Glasenapp and Kosiek judgments (see the Glasenapp v. Germany judgment of 28 August 1986, Series A no. 104 and the Kosiek v. Germany judgment of 28 August 1986, Series A no. 105).
• EGMR, 28.08.1986 - 9704/82

  KOSIEK c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.02.2002 - 59109/00

  In this respect they rely on the Glasenapp and Kosiek judgments (see the Glasenapp v. Germany judgment of 28 August 1986, Series A no. 104 and the Kosiek v. Germany judgment of 28 August 1986, Series A no. 105).

 
• BFH, 11.11.1991 - V B 54/91

  Versagung des Vorsteuerabzugs auf Grund steuerfreier Vermietung bei der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.02.2002 - 59109/00

  Section 8 (3) of the Decree on the enforcement of penalties for crimes, economic offences and misdemeanours committed during the state of war or the state of immediate danger for the independence and unity of the Republic of Croatia (the Enforcement of Penalties Decree - Uredba o izvrsenju sankcija izrecenih za krivicna djela, privredne prijestupe i prekrsaje za vrijeme ratnog stanja ili u slucaju neposredne ugrozenosti neovisnosti i jedinstvenosti Republike Hrvatske, Official Gazette no. 55/91) provides that the director of an institution may decide to dismiss an employee who is not fulfilling his duties or when it is established that he is not fit (podoban) to work in that institution.
• EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 24735/94

  SÜREK v. TURKEY (No. 3)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.02.2002 - 59109/00

  They rely on the Zana and Sürek judgments (see the Zana v. Turkey judgment of 25 November 1997, Reports 1997-VII and Sürek v. Turkey (no. 3) [GC], no. 24735/94, 8 July 1999, unreported).
• EGMR, 29.06.2000 - 47634/99

  KADIKIS contre la LETTONIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.02.2002 - 59109/00

  204, 208 and Kadikis v. Latvia (dec.), no. 47634/99, 29 June 2000).
• EKMR, 13.12.1982 - 9453/81

  X. c. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.02.2002 - 59109/00

  It recalls that in accordance with the generally recognised rules of international law, the Convention only governs, for each Contracting Party, facts subsequent to its entry into force with regard to that Party (see, for example, X. v. Portugal, application no. 9453/81, Commission decision of 13 December 1982, Decisions and Reports (DR) 31 pp.

• EGMR, 03.04.2012 - 54522/00

  KOTOV v. RUSSIA

  Rappelons que « dissocier'les décisions du juge interne des faits à l'origine de la procédure dénoncée reviendrait à donner un effet rétroactif à la Convention, ce qui serait contraire aux principes généraux du droit international (Jovanovic c. Croatie (déc.), no 59109/00, CEDH 2002-III).
• EGMR, 08.03.2006 - 59532/00

  BLECIC v. CROATIA

  The present case could not be distinguished from Jovanovic v. Croatia ((dec.), no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 28.06.2007 - 36549/03

  Recht auf ein faires Strafverfahren (Beweisverwertungsverbot; Verwertungsverbot …

  The Court recalls that in accordance with the generally recognised rules of international law, the Convention only governs, for each Contracting Party, facts subsequent to its entry into force with regard to that Party (see, among many other authorities, Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III).

 
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 7873/09

  SHEYMAN v. RUSSIA

  The Convention only governs facts subsequent to its entry into force with regard to that Party (see Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 27.05.2008 - 37780/02

  MELTEX LTD v. ARMENIA

  306-308; Kefalas and Others v. Greece, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 318-A, § 45; Kadikis v. Latvia (dec.), no. 47634/99, 29 June 2000; Veeber v. Estonia (no. 1), no. 37571/97, § 55, 7 November 2002; Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III; Litovchenko v. Russia (dec.), no. 69580/01, 18 April 2002; and Blecic, cited above).
• EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 23272/07

  HRDALO v. CROATIA

  This happened on 17 March 2004 when the Government of Croatia adopted the decision on his removal (see, mutatis mutandis, Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01

  DUNAYEV v. RUSSIA

  They relied on the cases of Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec., no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III) and Litovchenko v. Russia (dec., no. 69580/01, 18 April 2002) in this latter respect.
• EGMR, 31.07.2012 - 40358/05

  SHOLOKHOV v. ARMENIA AND MOLDOVA

  In this respect, the Court reiterates that, in accordance with the generally recognised rules of international law, the Convention only governs, for each Contracting Party, facts subsequent to its entry into force with regard to that Party (see, e.g., Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 04.11.2010 - 7319/05

  EYDELMAN AND OTHER

  The Convention only governs facts subsequent to its entry into force with regard to that Party (see Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 12.12.2006 - 23459/03

  BAYATYAN v. ARMENIA

  a) As to the allegedly deliberate delay in bringing the charge against him The Court recalls that in accordance with the generally recognised rules of international law, the Convention only governs, for each Contracting Party, facts subsequent to its entry into force with regard to that Party (see, e.g., Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 30.01.2003 - 59532/00

  BLECIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 09.07.2009 - 11093/07

  TARNOPOLSKAYA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 09.12.2004 - 31769/04

  Inadmissible
• EGMR, 23.05.2006 - 272/03

  ALIYEVA v. AZERBAIJAN