Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ERDOGAN v. TURKEY

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (4)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 21.02.1984 - 8544/79

  Öztürk ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 32985/12

  The Court also notes that the scope of the application of the fine in question is very limited, as the obligation to participate and vote in a bar election is only incumbent on attorneys who are members of a certain bar association (contrast Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 53, Series A no. 73).
• EGMR, 19.02.2013 - 47195/06

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 32985/12

  These principles have been applied with regard to several cases concerning proceedings before bar associations (see A. v. Finland (dec.), no. 44998/98, 8 January 2004, and Müller-Hartburg v. Austria, no. 47195/06, 19 February 2013).
• EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 79821/12

  MARUSIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 32985/12

  In the context of proceedings before professional disciplinary bodies, the Court has consistently held that disciplinary proceedings in which the right to continue to exercise a profession is at stake give rise to "contestations" (disputes) over civil rights and obligations (see Gautrin and Others v. France, 20 May 1998, § 33, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-III, and Marušić v. Croatia (dec.), no. 79821/12, § 71, 23 May 2017).
• EGMR, 08.01.2004 - 44998/98

  A. v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 32985/12

  These principles have been applied with regard to several cases concerning proceedings before bar associations (see A. v. Finland (dec.), no. 44998/98, 8 January 2004, and Müller-Hartburg v. Austria, no. 47195/06, 19 February 2013).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen