Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AZER AHMADOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for correspondence;Respect for private life);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  AHMADOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 02.08.1984 - 8691/79

  MALONE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.07.2021 - 3409/10

  With regard to the general principles related to the interception of telephone conversations, the Court refers to its judgments in Malone v. the United Kingdom (2 August 1984, §§ 64 and 67, Series A no. 82), and Dragojevic v. Croatia (no. 68955/11, §§ 78-84, 15 January 2015).
• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

  CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.07.2021 - 3409/10

  Having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties, and its findings under Article 8 of the Convention, the Court considers that it has examined the main legal question raised in the present application, and that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of the above-mentioned complaints (compare Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 24.04.1990 - 11801/85

  KRUSLIN c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.07.2021 - 3409/10

  According to the Court's well-established case-law, the wording "in accordance with the law" requires the impugned measure to have some basis in domestic law and to be compatible with the rule of law, which is expressly mentioned in the Preamble to the Convention and inherent in the object and purpose of Article 8. The law must thus meet quality requirements: it must be accessible to the person concerned and foreseeable as to its effects (see, for example, Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, § 27, Series A no. 176-A, and Kvasnica v. Slovakia, no. 72094/01, § 78, 9 June 2009).

• EGMR, 12.09.2023 - 64371/16

  WIEDER AND GUARNIERI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  However, having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties, and its findings above, the Court considers that it has examined the main legal questions raised in the present application and that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of the above-mentioned complaint (see, among many other authorities, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania (GC), no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014, and Azer Ahmadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 3409/10, § 79, 22 July 2021).
• EGMR, 18.01.2024 - 27390/17

  MAMMADOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  Having regard to the facts of the cases, the submissions of the parties and its findings under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the Court considers that it has examined the main legal questions raised in the present applications and there is no need to give a separate ruling on the remaining complaints (see, among other authorities, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014, and references cited therein; Azer Ahmadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 3409/10, §§ 77-79, 22 July 2021; Mehman Aliyev and Others v. Azerbaijan [Committee], no. 46930/10 and 11 others, §§ 52-54, 20 May 2021).
• EGMR, 07.07.2022 - 72611/14

  TAGIYEVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  Having regard to the facts of the case, the parties' submissions, and the conclusions reached above under Articles 2 and 10 of the Convention (see paragraphs 74 and 82 above), the Court considers that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of that complaint in the present case (compare Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014, and Azer Ahmadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 3409/10, § 79, 22 July 2021).

 
• EGMR, 21.09.2023 - 23689/14

  MAMMADOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  Having regard to the facts of the cases, the submissions of the parties and its findings under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the Court considers that it has examined the main legal questions raised in the present applications and there is no need to give a separate ruling on the remaining complaints (see, among other authorities, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014, and references cited therein; Mehman Aliyev and Others v. Azerbaijan [Committee], no. 46930/10 and 11 others, §§ 52-54, 20 May 2021; Azer Ahmadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 3409/10, §§ 77-79, 22 July 2021; and Imranova and others v. Azerbaijan, [Committee], nos.
• EGMR, 28.04.2022 - 59202/12

  HASANOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties and its findings under Article 5 § 1 and Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the Court considers that it has examined the main legal questions raised in the present application and that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the remaining complaints (see, among many other authorities, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania (GC), no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014, and the references cited therein; Mehman Aliyev and Others v. Azerbaijan [Committee], no. 46930/10 and 11 others, §§ 52-54, 20 May 2021; and Azer Ahmadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 3409/10, §§ 77-79, 22 July 2021).
• EGMR, 01.09.2022 - 72608/13

  GULIYEVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  Having regard to its findings above in respect of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention, as well as to the parties' submissions and the particular circumstances of the present case, the Court considers that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility or the merits of the applicant's complaints under Article 6 of the Convention (see, among many other authorities, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014; Azer Ahmadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 3409/10, §§ 77-79, 22 July 2021; and Mehman Aliyev and Others v. Azerbaijan [Committee], no. 46930/10 and 11 others, §§ 52-54, 20 May 2021).
• EGMR, 25.08.2022 - 36896/18

  W.O. AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

  Having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties, and its findings above, the Court considers that it has examined the main legal questions raised in the present application and that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of the above-mentioned complaints (see, among many other authorities, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania (GC), no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014, and Azer Ahmadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 3409/10, § 79, 22 July 2021).