Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 04.12.1989 - 15186/89 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1989,21075) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SMITH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 14+P1 Abs. 2, Art. 14, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 2 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 23.10.1985 - 8848/80
BENTHEM v. THE NETHERLANDS
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.1989 - 15186/89
He alleges that the local education officers were biased throughout his case, which they allegedly deliberately failed to understand; that there are no speedy statutory time limits for issuing a statement of special educational needs under section 7 of the Education Act 1981; that appeal committees have no decision making power if they agree with the appellant - they can only recommend reconsideration of the case by the LEA; that there is no reason why these committees could not have powers in compliance with Article 6; that there is no fair, oral or public hearing before the Secretary of State for Education, who himself, or rather whose civil servants, cannot constitute an independent and impartial tribunal; that he allegedly cannot decide past issues even if an LEA has acted dilatorily or unlawfully and he also takes secret expert advice which he does not show to the parties (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Benthem judgment of 23 October 1985, Series A no. 97).1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Benthem judgment of 23 October 1985, Series A no. 97).
- EGMR, 13.06.1979 - 6833/74
MARCKX v. BELGIUM
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.1989 - 15186/89
In this respect he invokes Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Belgian Linguistic judgment of 9 February 1967, Series A no. 5, and Marckx judgment of 13 June 1979, Series A no. 31). - EGMR, 29.05.1986 - 9384/81
Deumeland ./. Deutschland
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.1989 - 15186/89
Although the notion of a civil right under this provision is autonomous of any domestic law definitions, the Commission considers that for the purposes of the domestic law in question and the Convention, the right not to be denied elementary education falls, in the circumstances of the present case, squarely within the domain of public law, having no private law analogy and no repercussions on private rights or obligations (cf. Eur. Court HR, Deumeland judgment of 29 May 1986, Series A no. 100 pp. 24-25 paras. 71-74).