Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DUNAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 6, Art. 8, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  Partly admissible Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01
• EGMR, 24.05.2007 - 70142/01
• EGMR, 04.09.2019 - 70142/01

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01

  The Court reiterates that Article 13 of the Convention guarantees the availability at national level of a remedy to enforce the substance of the Convention rights and freedoms in whatever form they might happen to be secured in the domestic legal order, where there is an "arguable claim" of a violation of a substantive Convention provision (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, § 52).
• EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90

  YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01

  From the ratification date onwards, all the State's alleged acts or omissions must conform to the Convention or its Protocols even where they are merely extensions of an already existing situation (see, for example, YaÄ?cı and Sargın v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, p. 16, § 40, Almeida Garrett, Mascarenhas Falcão and Others v. Portugal, nos. 29813/96 and 30229/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-I, and Kovacic and others v. Slovenia (dec.), nos.
• EKMR, 08.09.1997 - 30229/96

  J. M.F. ET AUTRES contre le PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01

  From the ratification date onwards, all the State's alleged acts or omissions must conform to the Convention or its Protocols even where they are merely extensions of an already existing situation (see, for example, YaÄ?cı and Sargın v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-A, p. 16, § 40, Almeida Garrett, Mascarenhas Falcão and Others v. Portugal, nos. 29813/96 and 30229/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-I, and Kovacic and others v. Slovenia (dec.), nos.

 
• EGMR, 03.10.2008 - 44574/98

  Kovacic u. a. ./. Slowenien

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01

  44574/98, 45133/98 and 48316/98, 9 October 2003 and 1 April 2004).
• EGMR, 28.02.2002 - 59109/00

  JOVANOVIC contre la CROATIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01

  They relied on the cases of Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec., no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III) and Litovchenko v. Russia (dec., no. 69580/01, 18 April 2002) in this latter respect.
• EGMR, 18.04.2002 - 69580/01

  LITOVCHENKO v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01

  They relied on the cases of Jovanovic v. Croatia (dec., no. 59109/00, ECHR 2002-III) and Litovchenko v. Russia (dec., no. 69580/01, 18 April 2002) in this latter respect.
• EKMR, 03.07.1979 - 8560/79

  X. and Y. v. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 70142/01

  While it is true that the Court may have regard to facts prior to ratification inasmuch as they could be considered to have created a situation extending beyond that date or may be relevant for the understanding of facts occurring after that date (see Broniowski v. Poland (dec.) [GC], no. 31443/96, ECHR 2002-...), the possible existence of a continuing situation must be determined in the light of the special circumstances of each case (see X. and Y. v. Portugal, nos. 8560/79 and 8613/79, Commission decision of 3 July 1979, Decisions and Reports (DR) 16, p. 212).