Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PADURARU c. ROUMANIE

  Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation de P1-1 (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PADURARU v. ROMANIA

  Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of P1-1 (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 01.12.2005 - 63252/00
• EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 63252/00

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

• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 30544/96

  GARCÍA RUIZ v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.12.2005 - 63252/00

  It is primarily for the national authorities, notably the courts, to resolve problems of interpretation of domestic legislation (see, in particular, García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 22277/93

  ILHAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.12.2005 - 63252/00

  Such persons must be able to show that they were "directly affected" by the measure complained of (see, for example, Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v. Ireland, judgment of 29 October 1992, Series A no. 246-A, p. 22, § 44, and Ä°lhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, § 52, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 29.10.1992 - 14234/88

  OPEN DOOR AND DUBLIN WELL WOMAN v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.12.2005 - 63252/00

  Such persons must be able to show that they were "directly affected" by the measure complained of (see, for example, Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v. Ireland, judgment of 29 October 1992, Series A no. 246-A, p. 22, § 44, and Ä°lhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, § 52, ECHR 2000-VII).

 
• EGMR, 28.10.1999 - 24846/94

  ZIELINSKI ET PRADAL & GONZALEZ ET AUTRES c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.12.2005 - 63252/00

  The Court has already held that divergences in case-law are an inherent consequence of any judicial system which is based on a network of trial and appeal courts with authority over the area of their territorial jurisdiction, and that the role of a supreme court is precisely to resolve conflicts between decisions of the courts below (see Zielinski and Pradal and Gonzalez and Others v. France [GC], nos. 24846/94 and 34165/96 to 34173/96, § 59, ECHR 1999-VII).
• EGMR, 02.03.2004 - 48102/99

  SABIN POPESCU c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.12.2005 - 63252/00

  Admittedly, the Court in its settled case-law has examined failures to execute a judicial decision from the perspective of the first sentence of the first paragraph of Article 1 (see Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 40, ECHR 2002-III; JasiÅ«niene v. Lithuania, no. 41510/98, § 45, 6 March 2003; and Sabin Popescu v. Romania, no. 48102/99, § 80, 2 March 2004).
• EGMR, 09.11.2004 - 55631/00

  O.B. HELLER, A.S. c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.12.2005 - 63252/00

  While they have a wide margin of appreciation in assessing the existence of a problem of public concern warranting specific measures and in implementing social and economic policies (see Kopecký, cited above, § 37), where an issue in the general interest is at stake it is incumbent on the public authorities to act in good time, in an appropriate manner and with utmost consistency (see Beyeler, cited above, §§ 110 in fine, 114 and 120 in fine; Broniowski, cited above, § 151; Sovtransavto Holding, cited above, §§ 97-98; Novoseletskiy v. Ukraine, no. 47148/99, § 102, ECHR 2005-II; Blücher v. the Czech Republic, no. 58580/00, § 57, 11 January 2005; and O.B. Heller, a.s., v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 55631/00, 9 November 2004).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 29.11.2018 - C-235/17

  Kommission/ Ungarn (Usufruits sur terres agricoles)

  140 Vgl. in diesem Sinne EGMR, 1. Dezember 2005, Paduraru/Rumänien (CE:ECHR:2005:1201JUD006325200, § 77).