Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TARANTINO ET AUTRES c. ITALIE [Extraits]

  Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 2 MRK
  Partiellement irrecevable Non-violation de l'article 2 du Protocole n° 1 - Droit à l'instruction-général (article 2 du Protocole n° 1 - Droit à l'instruction) (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TARANTINO AND OTHERS v. ITALY

  Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 2 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible No violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to education-general (Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to education) (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TARANTINO AND OTHERS v. ITALY - [Deutsche Übersetzung] by the Austrian Institute for Human Rights (ÖIM)

  [DEU] Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to education-general (Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to education);No violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to education-general (Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Papierfundstellen

• NVwZ 2014, 929

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

• EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 44774/98

  LEYLA SAHIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 25851/09

  The Court reiterates that the guarantees of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 apply to existing institutions of higher education within the member States of the Council of Europe and that access to any institution of higher education existing at a given time is an inherent part of the right set out in the first sentence of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (see Leyla Sahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 44774/98, §§ 134-42, ECHR 2005-XI, and Mürsel Eren v. Turkey, no. 60856/00, § 41, ECHR 2006-II).

  Moreover, in a democratic society, the right to education, which is indispensable to the furtherance of human rights, plays such a fundamental role that a restrictive interpretation of the first sentence of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 would not be consistent with the aim or purpose of that provision (see Leyla Sahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 44774/98, § 137, ECHR 2005-XI).

• BVerfG, 29.05.1973 - 1 BvR 424/71

  Hochschul-Urteil

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 25851/09

  In the Hochschulurteil judgment (BVerfGE 35, 79), the German Constitutional Court also held that academic freedom could only be restricted to safeguard other constitutional values.
• EGMR, 04.05.1999 - 41974/98

  KUCHERENKO contre l'UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 25851/09

  It follows that the pursuit of such remedies will have consequences for the identification of the "final decision" and, correspondingly, for the calculation of the starting point for the running of the six-month rule (see, for example, Kucherenko v. Unkraine (dec.), no. 41974/98, 4 May 1999, and Prystavska v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 21287/02, 17 December 2002).

 
• EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5095/71

  KJELDSEN, BUSK MADSEN AND PEDERSEN v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 25851/09

  With regard to the content of the tests, albeit in a different context, the Court has held in Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v. Denmark (7 December 1976, § 53, Series A no. 23) that the setting and planning of the curriculum fall in principle within the competence of the Contracting States and it is not for the Court to rule on such matters.
• EGMR, 28.09.1999 - 45814/99

  NARDELLA v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 25851/09

  The Court notes that the first applicant, in lodging a special appeal with the President of the Republic in 2007, did not institute contentious proceedings falling within the scope of Article 6 of the Convention (see Nardella v. Italy (dec.), no. 45814/99, ECHR 1999-VII, and Nasalli Rocca (dec.), cited above), and therefore the provision is not applicable.
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 25851/09

  The purpose of Article 35 § 1 is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, inter alia, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 17.12.2002 - 21287/02

  PRYSTAVSKA contre l'UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 25851/09

  It follows that the pursuit of such remedies will have consequences for the identification of the "final decision" and, correspondingly, for the calculation of the starting point for the running of the six-month rule (see, for example, Kucherenko v. Unkraine (dec.), no. 41974/98, 4 May 1999, and Prystavska v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 21287/02, 17 December 2002).

• BVerfG, 19.12.2017 - 1 BvL 3/14

  Numerus clausus: Vorschriften über die Studienplatzvergabe für das Fach …

  Das Recht auf chancengleichen Zugang zum Hochschulstudium besteht damit nur in dem Rahmen, in dem der Staat tatsächlich Ausbildungskapazitäten zur Verfügung stellt (ähnlich auch EGMR, Tarantino u.a./Italien, Urteil vom 2. April 2013, Nr. 25851/09 u.a., § 51, zu Art. 2 des 1. Zusatzprotokolls zur EMRK).
• EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 21623/13

  KÖNYV-TÁR KFT AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

  25851/09 and 2 others, ECHR 2013.
• OVG Niedersachsen, 07.12.2020 - 2 NB 9/20

  Ausbildungsengpass; außerkapazitär; Engpass; Erprobungsphase; European Medical …

  Wenn sie ausländische, d.h. hier deutsche Studierende aufnimmt, ist sie rechtlich allenfalls durch Unionsrecht (…vgl. hierzu z.B. EuGH, Urt. v. 7.7.2005 - C-147/03 -, DVBl. 2005, 1253), anderes höherrangiges Recht (vgl. z.B. EGMR, II. Sektion, Urt. v. 2.4.2013 - 25851/09 u.a.-, NVwZ 2014, 929) und vertragliche Abmachungen gebunden.

 
• EGMR, 10.11.2020 - 37866/18

  UZUN v. TURKEY

  The Court further notes, as the Constitutional Court also pointed out, that the contested restriction must be assessed in the context of higher education (see Tarantino and Others v. Italy, nos. 25851/09 and 2 Others, § 50, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 12.12.2017 - 50124/07

  ÇÖLGEÇEN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  The Court reiterates that the guarantees of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 apply to existing institutions of higher education within the member States of the Council of Europe and that access to any institution of higher education existing at a given time is an inherent part of the right set out in the first sentence of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (see Tarantino and Others v. Italy, nos. 25851/09, 29284/09 and 64090/09, § 43, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 11.07.2023 - 783/16

  SYPIOLA ET AUTRES c. POLOGNE

  Les autorités nationales jouissent en la matière d'une certaine marge d'appréciation, mais il appartient à la Cour de statuer en dernier ressort sur le respect des exigences de la Convention (Leyla ?žahin, précité, § 154, et Tarantino et autres c. Italie, nos 25851/09 et suiv., § 44, 2 avril 2013).
• EGMR, 06.05.2014 - 4714/06

  NDIKUMANA v. THE NETHERLANDS

  The question is therefore legitimate whether the applicant chose to exhaust an effective domestic remedy (see, among many other authorities, Van Oosterwijck v. Belgium, 6 November 1980, § 27, Series A no. 40; Tsomtsos and Others v. Greece, 15 November 1996, § 32, Reports 1996-V, Iatridis v. Greece [GC], no. 31107/96, § 47, ECHR 1999-II; and Tarantino and Others v. Italy, nos. 25851/09, 29284/09 and 64090/09, § 29, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).