Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  CARMELINA MICALLEF v. MALTA

  Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Deprivation of property) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  MICALLEF v. MALTA

  Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2021 - 23264/18

  The purpose of this rule is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, among other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75

  SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2021 - 23264/18

  The requisite balance will not be struck where the person concerned bears an individual and excessive burden (see Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, §§ 69-74, Series A no. 52, and Brumarescu v. Romania [GC], no. 28342/95, § 78, ECHR 1999-VII).
• EGMR, 31.01.1986 - 8734/79

  BARTHOLD v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2021 - 23264/18

  The second and third rules are concerned with particular instances of interference with the right to peaceful enjoyment of property and should therefore be construed in the light of the general principle enunciated in the first rule (see, among other authorities, James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 37, Series A no. 98; Beyeler v. Italy [GC], no. 33202/96, § 98, ECHR 2000-I; Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no. 31443/96, § 134, ECHR 2004-V and Saliba v. Malta, no. 4251/02, § 31, 8 November 2005).

• EGMR - 25915/23 (anhängig)

  SCIORTINO AND VELLA v. MALTA

  Are the applicants still victims of the violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention upheld by the domestic courts? In particular, were the applicants awarded adequate compensation in line with the Court's case-law in such cases (see, for example, Mifsud and Others v. Malta, no. 38770/17, §§ 114-116, 13 October 2020, and Carmelina Micallef v. Malta, no. 23264/18, §§ 61-63, 28 October 2021)?.

  Has there been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (see, for example, Carmelina Micallef v. Malta, no. 23264/18, §§ 48-49 and 52-55, 28 October 2021)? The parties should inform the Court about whether the compensation has been paid and the deed of transfer finalised, as well as about any relevant details in this respect.

• EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 6319/21

  FABBRI AND OTHERS v. SAN MARINO

  The only remedies which need to be exhausted are effective remedies that have a prospect of success (see Carmelina Micallef v. Malta, no. 23264/18, § 28, 28 October 2021).