Volltextveröffentlichungen (5)

• Wolters Kluwer
• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SØRENSEN ET RASMUSSEN c. DANEMARK

  Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation de l'art. 11 Dommage matériel - réparation pécuniaire Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure de la Convention (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SØRENSEN AND RASMUSSEN v. DENMARK

  Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 11 Pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial awards - Convention proceedings (englisch)

• Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte

  (englisch)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 20.03.2003 - 52562/99
• EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99, 52620/99

Papierfundstellen

• BB 2006, 378

Wird zitiert von ... (27)Zitiert selbst (10)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 13.08.1981 - 7601/76

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  The Act on Protection against Dismissal due to Association Membership was passed by Parliament in 1982 as a result, inter alia, of the British Rail judgment (Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom, Series A no. 44) delivered by the Court of Human Rights in 1981.

  "Act no. 285 of 9 June 1982 on Protection against Dismissal due to Association Membership was passed notably in order to comply with the negative right to freedom of association to the extent that such an obligation could be established according to the interpretation of Article 11 of the Convention given by the Court of Human Rights in the Young, James and Webster v. the UK judgment, Series A no. 44 (British Rail).

  The Act on Protection against Dismissal due to Association Membership of 9 June 1982 (which was passed as a direct result of the Court's ruling in Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44), as amended by Act no. 347 of 29 May 1990, reads in so far as relevant:.

  "According to the Young, James and Webster v. UK judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44 (British Rail) it is in breach of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning freedom of association to dismiss an employee who refuses to join a trade union with whom the employer has entered into a closed-shop agreement at a time after the employment of the employee, in so far as membership was not a condition for the employment.

  The Court's case-law on this point had not altered since the case of Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom (judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44).

  However, as was emphasised by the Court in the case of Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom (judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, § 53), it is not the role of the Court to review a closed-shop system as such in relation to the Convention or to express an opinion on every consequence or form of compulsion which it may engender.

  In Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom (judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, § 52) the Court held that, even assuming that a general rule such as the one contained in Article 20 § 2 of the Universal Declaration could not be regarded as itself enshrined in the Convention, it did not follow that the negative aspect of a person's freedom of association fell completely outside the ambit of Article 11 and that each and every compulsion to join a particular trade union was compatible with the intention of that provision.

• EGMR, 30.06.1993 - 16130/90

  Sigurdur A. Sigurjónsson ./. Island

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  Accordingly, Article 11 must also be viewed as encompassing a negative right of association or, put in other words, a right not to be forced to join an association (see Sigurdur Sigurjónsson v. Iceland judgment of 30 June 1993, Series A no. 264, § 35).

  That a negative right of association is protected by Article 11, at least to some extent, has been confirmed in the Court's subsequent case-law, but as the majority rightly stressed, the Court has hitherto not taken any definite stand on whether the negative and positive aspects of the right to freedom of association should be afforded the same level of protection (see, in particular, Sigurjónsson v. Iceland (judgment of 30 June 1993, Series A no. 264, § 35)).

• EGMR, 20.04.1993 - 14327/88

  SIBSON c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  The same goes for the remainder of the judgments that the parties have referred to (Sibson v. U.K. judgment of 20 April 1993, Series A no. 258 and the Gustafsson v. Sweden judgment of 25 April 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-II)".

  In Sibson v. the United Kingdom (judgment of 20 April 1993, Series A no. 258) a closed-shop agreement never came into effect although the applicant was forced to leave his job because of a demand to join a union which was not prescribed at the time of his recruitment.

• EGMR, 20.03.2003 - 52620/99

  JENSEN and RASMUSSEN v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  52562/99 and 52620/99 against the Kingdom of Denmark lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by two Danish nationals, Morten Sørensen ("the first applicant") and Ove Rasmussen ("the second applicant"), on 7 October 1999 and 22 September 1999 respectively.

  The question of the lawfulness of closed-shop agreements in relation to the Act on Protection against Dismissal due to Association Membership of 9 June 1982 and to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was examined by the Supreme Court in a judgment of 6 May 1999 (concerning the applicant Jensen in the original application no. 52620/99, Jensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark).

• EGMR, 15.02.2001 - 42393/98

  Verbot des Tragens eines islamischen Kopftuches während des Unterrichtens an …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  However it is far from being unusual that an individual seeking a job is "compelled" to accept requirements which are contrary to, for example, his personal views or interfere with his private or family life (see mutatis mutandis Dahlab v. Switzerland (dec.) no. 42393/98, 15 February 2001 (requirement for a teacher not to wear a headscarf) and Madsen v. Denmark (dec.) no. 58341/00, 7 November 2002 (requirement to undergo random urine tests for alcohol, drugs or other intoxicating substances)).
• EGMR, 02.07.2002 - 30668/96

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  Thus, in the context of Article 11, although the essential object is to protect the individual against arbitrary interference by public authorities with the exercise of the rights protected, the national authorities may in certain circumstances be obliged to intervene in the relationship between private individuals by taking reasonable and appropriate measures to secure the effective enjoyment of those rights (see, mutatis mutandis, Young, James and Webster, § 49 and Gustafsson, § 45, both cited above, and Wilson the National Union of Journalists and Others v. the United Kingdom, nos. 30668/96, 30671/96 and 30678/96, § 41, ECHR 2002 V).
• EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 6538/74

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  According to the Court's established case-law, costs and expenses will not be awarded under Article 41 unless it is established that they were actually incurred, were necessarily incurred and were also reasonable as to quantum (see Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 6 November 1980 (former Article 50), Series A no. 38, p. 13, § 23).
• EGMR, 09.11.2000 - 29529/95

  SCHETTINI AND OTHERS v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  In the area of trade-union freedom and in view of the sensitive character of the social and political issues involved in achieving a proper balance between the respective interests of labour and management, and given the wide degree of divergence between the domestic systems in this field, the Contracting States enjoy a wide margin of appreciation as to how the freedom of trade unions to protect the occupational interests of their members may be secured (see Swedish Engine Drivers' Union v. Sweden, judgment of 6 February 1976, Series A no. 20, pp. 14-15, § 39; Gustafsson, cited above, pp. 652-53, § 45; and Schettini and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 29529/95, 9 November 2000; Wilson the National Union of Journalists and Others, cited above, § 44).
• EGMR, 07.11.2002 - 58341/00

  MADSEN v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  However it is far from being unusual that an individual seeking a job is "compelled" to accept requirements which are contrary to, for example, his personal views or interfere with his private or family life (see mutatis mutandis Dahlab v. Switzerland (dec.) no. 42393/98, 15 February 2001 (requirement for a teacher not to wear a headscarf) and Madsen v. Denmark (dec.) no. 58341/00, 7 November 2002 (requirement to undergo random urine tests for alcohol, drugs or other intoxicating substances)).
• EGMR, 02.07.2002 - 30671/96

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2006 - 52562/99

  Thus, in the context of Article 11, although the essential object is to protect the individual against arbitrary interference by public authorities with the exercise of the rights protected, the national authorities may in certain circumstances be obliged to intervene in the relationship between private individuals by taking reasonable and appropriate measures to secure the effective enjoyment of those rights (see, mutatis mutandis, Young, James and Webster, § 49 and Gustafsson, § 45, both cited above, and Wilson the National Union of Journalists and Others v. the United Kingdom, nos. 30668/96, 30671/96 and 30678/96, § 41, ECHR 2002 V).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• BVerfG, 11.07.2017 - 1 BvR 1571/15

  Das Tarifeinheitsgesetz ist weitgehend mit dem Grundgesetz vereinbar

  Das umfasst die individuelle und die kollektive Koalitionsfreiheit auch einer Gewerkschaft und verbietet die Vorgabe gewerkschaftlicher Monopole (vgl. EGMR (GK), Sørensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark, Entscheidung vom 11. Januar 2006, Nr. 52562/99 und 52620/99, §§ 64 ff.).
• EGMR, 14.12.2023 - 59433/18

  EGMR zu den Rechten von Beamten: Lehrer dürften nicht streiken

  In ascertaining whether restrictions on union freedoms have complied with Article 11, the Court must carry out a proportionality assessment which takes into account all the circumstances of the case - and the totality of the measures taken by the State to secure trade-union freedom -, even where the restrictions affected an essential element of such freedom (see Demir and Baykara, cited above, §§ 154 et seq., in respect of the right to collective bargaining; Tüm Haber Sen and Çınar, cited above, in respect of the right to form and join a trade union; and Sørensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark, [GC], nos. 52562/99 and 52620/99, §§ 64-65 and 76, ECHR 2006-I, in relation to closed-shop agreements; see also Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) and Norwegian Transport Workers' Union (NTF), cited above, § 94).
• EGMR, 20.10.2016 - 7334/13

  MURSIC v. CROATIA

  Sørensen et Rasmussen c. Danemark [GC], nos 52562/99 et 52620/99, CEDH 2006-I.

• EGMR, 12.05.2015 - 73235/12

  IDENTOBA AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

  In that context, it has held that although individual interests must on occasion be subordinated to those of a group, democracy does not simply mean that the views of the majority must always prevail: a balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position (see Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom, 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, p. 25, § 63; Sørensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark [GC], nos. 52562/99 and 52620/99, § 58, ECHR 2006-I, and Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, §§ 37-41, 24 July 2012).
• VGH Baden-Württemberg, 30.03.2010 - 6 S 2429/09

  Zu den Auswirkungen eines formellen Fehlers des Abhilfeverfahrens oder des …

  Rn. 6 Das Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte vom 11.01.2006 - 52562/99 und 52620/99, 52562/99, 52620/99 - (RIW 2006, 378) sowie der ebenfalls vom Antragsteller herangezogene Beschluss des Bundesverfassungsgerichts vom 07.12.2001 - 1 BvR 1806/98 - (GewArch 2002, 111) führen entgegen dessen Ansicht ebenfalls nicht zu einer Wiederaufnahme nach § 153 Abs. 1 VwGO, § 580 Nr. 7a oder 7b ZPO.
• VG Düsseldorf, 21.11.2007 - 20 K 6268/06

  Dem Grunde nach bestehende Gewerbesteuerpflicht als Voraussetzung für die …

  Rn. 74 Vgl. die Entscheidungen des EGMR vom 23. Juni 1991 i.S. Le Compte, van Leuwen und de Meyere gegen Belgien, Amtliche Sammlung Serie A Nr. 43; vom 30. Juni 1993 i.S. Sigurdur A. Sigurjónsson gegen Island, Amtliche Sammlung Serie A Nr. 264; vom 11. Januar 2006 i.S. Sørensen und Rasmussen gegen Dänemark, Beschwerden Nr. 52562/99 und 52620/99.

  Rn. 76 Aus der von der Klägerin zitierten Entscheidung des EGMR vom 11. Januar 2006 i.S. Sørensen und Rasmussen gegen Dänemark, Beschwerde Nrn. 52562/99 und 52620/99, kann die Klägerin nichts für sich herleiten.

• EGMR, 26.04.2016 - 25501/07

  NOVIKOVA v. RUSSIA and 16 other applications

  While some of the applicants may be understood as ascertaining the existence of and alleging interference with a right not to be associated with somebody else's "expressive conduct"/demonstration (see, mutatis mutandis, Sørensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark [GC], nos. 52562/99 and 52620/99, § 54, ECHR 2006-I), the Court finds it appropriate to examine the present case under Article 10 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Tatár and Fáber v. Hungary, no. 26005/08 and 26160/08, § 29, 12 June 2012, and Açık and Others v. Turkey, no. 31451/03, §§ 35-36 and 40, 13 January 2009), taking into account, where appropriate, the general principles it has established in the context of Article 11 of the Convention (see, in particular, paragraphs 162-168 below in relation to Ms Novikova, Mr Kirpichev and Mr Romakhin; see also Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 19, 24 July 2012, and Palomo Sánchez and Others v. Spain [GC], nos. 28955/06, 28957/06, 28959/06 and 28964/06, §§ 33 and 52, ECHR 2011).
• EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 47335/06

  [ENG]

  They submitted that in assessing the extent, if any, of the State's positive obligation, the Court should consider whether the nature of the interference struck at the "very substance" of the right or freedom concerned (Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom, 13 August 1981, § 55, Series A no. 44, Sørensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark [GC], nos. 52562/99 and 52620/99, § 54, ECHR 2006-I).

  Consequently, the Court accepts that the consequences of his dismissal were serious and capable of striking at the very substance of his rights under Article 11 of the Convention (Sørensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark [GC], nos. 52562/99 and 52620/99, §§ 61 and 62, ECHR 2006-I and Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 55).

• EGMR, 18.10.2011 - 41561/07

  [ENG]

  52562/99 and 52620/99, §§ 54 and 63, ECHR 2006-I).
• EGMR, 04.04.2017 - 35009/05

  [FRE]

  Il s'ensuit que la seule question qui se pose au sujet de ce grief est celle de savoir si l'État a offert une protection suffisante contre les actes de l'employeur, afin d'assurer le respect effectif des droits du syndicat requérant (voir, mutatis mutandis, Sørensen et Rasmussen c. Danemark [GC], nos 52562/99 et 52620/99, § 57, CEDH 2006-I).
• EGMR, 27.03.2018 - 5871/07

  BERKOVICH v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 01.12.2020 - 46712/15

  BERKMAN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 16.06.2015 - 46551/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 15.02.2007 - 54461/00

  SOYSAL ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 19.11.2024 - 55789/19

  ALMAZ c. TURQUIE et 3 autres affaires
• EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 976/20

  HOPPEN AND TRADE UNION OF AMBER GRID LTD. EMPLOYEES v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 19.11.2024 - 51194/19

  KAYA c. TURQUIE
• OVG Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, 18.04.2011 - 2 L 70/06

  Nachträgliche Beschränkung geltend gemachter Zulassungsgründe; Freibetrag nach § …
• EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 43351/12

  OOO TAMBOV-INFORM v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.04.2018 - 20006/08

  ÜSTÜNER c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 17.12.2024 - 52977/19

  HELLGREN v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 02.12.2008 - 20161/06

  Olafsson ./. Island
• EGMR, 03.05.2016 - 65397/13

  UNITE THE UNION v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• VG Münster, 05.04.2011 - 3 K 1672/10

  Heranziehung zu sog. IHK-Beiträgen einer in England ansässigen Limited mit …
• EGMR, 01.07.2008 - 16254/02

  BEYAZ c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 20.03.2003 - 62560/00

  HOFFMAN KARLSKOV v. DENMARK
• EGMR, 07.12.2010 - 9861/05

  IANOPOL c. ROUMANIE