Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 04.01.2012 - 68726/10 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,15558) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BABENKO v. UKRAINE
N/A MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (6)
- EGMR, 09.10.2003 - 48321/99
SLIVENKO v. LATVIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2012 - 68726/10
Moreover, the Court reiterates that Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 does not guarantee the right to acquire property (see Van der Mussele v. Belgium, 23 November 1983, § 48, Series A no. 70, and Slivenko v. Latvia (dec.) [GC], no. 48321/99, § 121, ECHR 2002-II). - EGMR, 07.07.2005 - 41302/02
MALINOVSKIY v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2012 - 68726/10
Even assuming, as the Government suggested, that it would be possible for the first applicant to privatise the apartment (see, mutatis mutandis, Malinovskiy v. Russia, no. 41302/02, § 44, ECHR 2005-VII (extracts), and Ivan Panchenko v. Ukraine, no. 10911/05, § 51, 10 December 2009), in the absence of any comments in this respect from the applicants, the Court cannot conclude to what extent such possibility is tangible. - EGMR, 12.04.2006 - 65731/01
STEC ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2012 - 68726/10
65731/01 and 65900/01, §§ 53-55, ECHR 2005- X, and Andrejeva v. Latvia [GC], no. 55707/00, § 77, 18 February 2009).
- EGMR, 18.02.2009 - 55707/00
Andrejeva ./. Lettland
- EGMR, 10.12.2009 - 10911/05
PANCHENKO v. UKRAINE
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2012 - 68726/10
Even assuming, as the Government suggested, that it would be possible for the first applicant to privatise the apartment (see, mutatis mutandis, Malinovskiy v. Russia, no. 41302/02, § 44, ECHR 2005-VII (extracts), and Ivan Panchenko v. Ukraine, no. 10911/05, § 51, 10 December 2009), in the absence of any comments in this respect from the applicants, the Court cannot conclude to what extent such possibility is tangible. - EGMR, 23.11.1983 - 8919/80
VAN DER MUSSELE c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2012 - 68726/10
Moreover, the Court reiterates that Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 does not guarantee the right to acquire property (see Van der Mussele v. Belgium, 23 November 1983, § 48, Series A no. 70, and Slivenko v. Latvia (dec.) [GC], no. 48321/99, § 121, ECHR 2002-II).