Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  R.E. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);Non-pecuniary ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  R.E. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

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

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 27.10.2015 - 62498/11
• EGMR, 07.06.2016 - 62498/11

Papierfundstellen

• NJW 2016, 2013

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 06.09.1978 - 5029/71

  Klass u.a. ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.10.2015 - 62498/11

  In this regard, it is now well-established that an individual may under certain conditions claim to be the victim of a violation occasioned by the mere existence of legislation permitting secret measures without having to demonstrate that such measures were in fact applied to him (Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, § 34, Series A no. 28).
• EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 35623/05

  Recht auf Achtung des Privatlebens (Datenschutz; GPS-Überwachung; Observation; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.10.2015 - 62498/11

  In Uzun v. Germany, no. 35623/05, § 66, ECHR 2010 (extracts) the Court accepted that the monitoring of a car's movements by GPS interfered with the applicant's Article 8 rights.
• EGMR, 29.06.2006 - 54934/00

  Menschenrechte: Verletzung der Privatsphäre und des Briefgeheimnisses durch das …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.10.2015 - 62498/11

  In the special context of secret surveillance measures, the Court has found that "foreseeability" requires that domestic law be sufficiently clear to give citizens an adequate indication as to the circumstances in which and the conditions on which public authorities are empowered to resort to any such measures (see, for example, the admissibility decision in Weber and Saravia v. Germany (dec.), no. 54934/00, § 93, ECHR 2006-XI).

 
• EGMR, 06.12.2012 - 12323/11

  MICHAUD v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.10.2015 - 62498/11

  The Court has recognised that, while Article 8 protects the confidentiality of all correspondence between individuals, it will afford "strengthened protection" to exchanges between lawyers and their clients, as lawyers would be unable to defend their clients if they were unable to guarantee that their exchanges would remain confidential (Michaud v. France, no. 12323/11, § 118, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 01.07.2008 - 58243/00

  LIBERTY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.10.2015 - 62498/11

  The requirement that any interference must be "in accordance with the law" under Article 8 § 2 will only be met when three conditions are satisfied: the impugned measure must have some basis in domestic law; the domestic law must be compatible with the rule of law and accessible to the person concerned; and the person concerned must be able to foresee the consequences of the domestic law for him (see, among many other authorities, Rotaru v. Romania [GC], no. 28341/95, § 52, ECHR 2000-V, Liberty and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 58243/00, § 59, 1 July 2008, and Iordachi and Others v. Moldova, no. 25198/02, § 37, 10 February 2009).
• EGMR, 10.02.2009 - 25198/02

  IORDACHI AND OTHERS v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.10.2015 - 62498/11

  The requirement that any interference must be "in accordance with the law" under Article 8 § 2 will only be met when three conditions are satisfied: the impugned measure must have some basis in domestic law; the domestic law must be compatible with the rule of law and accessible to the person concerned; and the person concerned must be able to foresee the consequences of the domestic law for him (see, among many other authorities, Rotaru v. Romania [GC], no. 28341/95, § 52, ECHR 2000-V, Liberty and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 58243/00, § 59, 1 July 2008, and Iordachi and Others v. Moldova, no. 25198/02, § 37, 10 February 2009).

• EGMR, 16.06.2016 - 49176/11

  VERSINI-CAMPINCHI ET CRASNIANSKI c. FRANCE

  Lorsqu'il s'agit de l'interception d'une communication, la condition de prévisibilité exige que le droit interne précise notamment la définition des catégories de personnes susceptibles d'être mises sur écoute judiciaire, la nature des infractions pouvant y donner lieu, la fixation d'une limite à la durée de l'exécution de la mesure, les conditions d'établissement des procès-verbaux de synthèse consignant les conversations interceptées, et l'utilisation et l'effacement des enregistrements réalisés (Valenzuela Contreras c. Espagne, 30 juillet 1998, § 59, Recueil des arrêts et décisions 1998-V ; voir aussi R.E. c. Royaume-Uni, no 62498/11, § 123, 27 octobre 2015, ainsi que Roman Zakharov, précité, § 231).