Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 34907/05 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2010,62550) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
HINCZEWSKI v. POLAND
Art. 8 MRK
Violation of Art. 8 (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94
Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 34907/05
The existence of such remedies must be sufficiently certain not only in theory but also in practice, failing which they will lack the requisite accessibility and effectiveness; it falls to the respondent State to establish that these various conditions are satisfied (see, among other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 75, ECHR 1999-V). - EGMR, 06.12.2005 - 20841/02
DROZDOWSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 34907/05
No compelling reasons have been found to exist for monitoring or delaying an applicant's correspondence with the Court (see Campbell, cited above, §§ 48 and 62; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 84, ECHR 2001-III; and Drozdowski v. Poland, no. 20841/02, §§ 27-31, 6 December 2005). - EGMR, 25.03.1992 - 13590/88
CAMPBELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 34907/05
The Court reiterates that any "interference by a public authority" with the right to respect for correspondence will contravene Article 8 of the Convention unless it is "in accordance with the law", pursues one or more of the legitimate aims referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article and is "necessary in a democratic society" in order to achieve them (see, among many other authorities and with specific reference to prisoners' correspondence, Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, p. 32, § 84; Campbell v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1992, Series A no. 233, p. 16, § 34; and Niedbala v. Poland no. 27915/95, § 78). - EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72
SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 34907/05
The Court reiterates that any "interference by a public authority" with the right to respect for correspondence will contravene Article 8 of the Convention unless it is "in accordance with the law", pursues one or more of the legitimate aims referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article and is "necessary in a democratic society" in order to achieve them (see, among many other authorities and with specific reference to prisoners' correspondence, Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, p. 32, § 84; Campbell v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1992, Series A no. 233, p. 16, § 34; and Niedbala v. Poland no. 27915/95, § 78).