Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KIKOLASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 14+6, Art. 14, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

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

• EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75

  SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 37341/04

  Finally, the right must be civil in character (see, among other authorities, Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, § 81, Series A no. 52; Masson and Van Zon v. the Netherlands, 28 September 1995, § 44, Series A no. 327-A; Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 56, Series A no. 294-B).
• EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 29392/95

  Z ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 37341/04

  In determining the applicability of Article 6 § 1 in the present case, the primary question to be answered is whether the applicant's action for non-pecuniary damage could arguably be said to be recognised as a "right" or "legitimate interest" under the Georgian law (see, amongst others, Mennitto v. Italy [GC], no. 33804/96, § 27, ECHR 2000-X; Salerno v. Italy, 12 October 1992, § 14, Series A no. 245-D; Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, § 87, ECHR 2001-V; Berkmann v. Austria (dec.), no. 59879/00, 14 November 2002).
• EGMR, 10.03.2004 - 56672/00

  SENATOR LINES GmbH gegen Belgien, Dänemark, Deutschland, Finnland, Frankreich, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 37341/04

  Consequently, unless the authorities should attempt to enforce the order in the future, the applicant cannot at the present stage claim to be a victim of a "potential" violation of the Convention within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention (see generally in this context, Senator Lines v. the EU States (dec.), no. 56672/00, ECHR 2004 IV and Segi and Gestoras Pro-Amnistia and Others v. Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom (dec.), nos.

 
• EGMR, 21.09.1994 - 17101/90

  FAYED c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 37341/04

  Finally, the right must be civil in character (see, among other authorities, Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, § 81, Series A no. 52; Masson and Van Zon v. the Netherlands, 28 September 1995, § 44, Series A no. 327-A; Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 56, Series A no. 294-B).
• EGMR, 28.09.1995 - 15346/89

  MASSON AND VAN ZON v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 37341/04

  Finally, the right must be civil in character (see, among other authorities, Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, § 81, Series A no. 52; Masson and Van Zon v. the Netherlands, 28 September 1995, § 44, Series A no. 327-A; Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 56, Series A no. 294-B).
• EGMR, 23.05.2002 - 6422/02

  SEGI ET AUTRES & GESTORAS PRO-AMNISTIA ET AUTRES c. 15 ÉTATS DE L'UNION …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 37341/04

  6422/02 and 9916/02, ECHR 2002-V, with further references).
• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 33804/96

  MENNITTO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 37341/04

  In determining the applicability of Article 6 § 1 in the present case, the primary question to be answered is whether the applicant's action for non-pecuniary damage could arguably be said to be recognised as a "right" or "legitimate interest" under the Georgian law (see, amongst others, Mennitto v. Italy [GC], no. 33804/96, § 27, ECHR 2000-X; Salerno v. Italy, 12 October 1992, § 14, Series A no. 245-D; Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, § 87, ECHR 2001-V; Berkmann v. Austria (dec.), no. 59879/00, 14 November 2002).

• EGMR, 22.06.2010 - 9297/08

  TEIMURAZ ANDRONIKASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  It is to be recalled that the Court may not, by its own interpretation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, create a right that has no basis in the domestic legal system (see, Masson and Van Zon, cited above, § 52; Kikolashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no. 37341/04, 3 February 2009; Mennitto v. Italy [GC], no. 33804/96, § 27, ECHR 2000-X; Salerno v. Italy, 12 October 1992, § 14, Series A no. 245-D; Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, § 87, ECHR 2001-V).