Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  EFE v. AUSTRIA

  Art. 14, Art. 14+P1 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  No violation of Article 14+P1-1 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  EFE v. AUSTRIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  [DEU] No violation of Article 14+P1-1 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions;Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Papierfundstellen

• NVwZ-RR 2014, 573

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 08.07.1986 - 9006/80

  LITHGOW AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 9134/06

  A difference in treatment in the exercise of a right laid down by the Convention must not only pursue a legitimate aim: Article 14 is likewise violated when it is clearly established that there is no "reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be realised" (see, for example, Burden v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 13378/05, § 60, ECHR 2008; Petrovic, cited above, § 30, and Lithgow and Others v. the United Kingdom, 8 July 1986, § 177, Series A no. 102).
• EGMR, 12.04.2006 - 65731/01

  STEC ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 9134/06

  If, however, a State does decide to create a benefits or pension scheme, it must do so in a manner which is compatible with Article 14 of the Convention (see Stec and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 65731/01 and 65900/01, § 53, ECHR 2006-VI).
• EGMR, 28.10.1987 - 8695/79

  Inze ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 9134/06

  The scope of the margin of appreciation will vary according to the circumstances, the subject matter and its background (see Rasmussen v. Denmark, 28 November 1984, § 40, Series A no. 87, and Inze v. Austria, 28 October 1987, § 41, Series A no. 126), but the final decision as to observance of the Convention's requirements rests with the Court.
• EGMR, 28.11.1984 - 8777/79

  RASMUSSEN v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 9134/06

  The scope of the margin of appreciation will vary according to the circumstances, the subject matter and its background (see Rasmussen v. Denmark, 28 November 1984, § 40, Series A no. 87, and Inze v. Austria, 28 October 1987, § 41, Series A no. 126), but the final decision as to observance of the Convention's requirements rests with the Court.
• EGMR, 16.11.2004 - 29865/96

  Diskriminierung türkischer Ehefrauen durch Verpflichtung zur Tragung des Namens …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 9134/06

  The Court has also held that not every difference in treatment will amount to a violation of Article 14. It must be established that other persons in an analogous or relevantly similar situation enjoy preferential treatment and that this distinction is discriminatory (see Ünal Tekeli v. Turkey, no. 29865/96, § 49, ECHR 2004-X).

• EGMR, 19.12.2018 - 20452/14

  MOLLA SALI v. GREECE

  For example, a discrimination issue arose in cases where the applicants" status, which served as the alleged basis for discriminatory treatment, was determined in relation to their family situation, such as their children's place of residence (see Efe v. Austria, no. 9134/06, § 48, 8 January 2013).
• EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 3891/19

  CÎNTA v. ROMANIA

  For example, a discrimination issue arose in cases where the applicants" status, which served as the alleged basis for discriminatory treatment, was determined in relation to their family situation, such as their children's place of residence (see Efe v. Austria, no. 9134/06, § 48, 8 January 2013).
• EGMR, 01.06.2021 - 19237/16

  ASSOCIATION ACCEPT AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  For example, a discrimination issue arose in cases where the applicants" status, which served as the alleged basis for discriminatory treatment, was determined in relation to their family situation, such as their children's place of residence (see Efe v. Austria, no. 9134/06, § 48, 8 January 2013).
• EGMR, 16.09.2021 - 20741/10

  X v. POLAND

  For example, a discrimination issue arose in a case where the applicant's status, the alleged basis for the discriminatory treatment in question, had been determined in relation to his family situation, namely his children's place of residence (see Efe v. Austria, no. 9134/06, § 48, 8 January 2013).
• EGMR, 28.02.2017 - 41069/11

  GOURI c. FRANCE

  Dans la présente affaire, la Cour prend note, au contraire, des explications fournies par le Gouvernement, dont il résulte que l'ASI a été établie par le législateur dans le but de répondre spécifiquement à certains besoins de personnes résidant sur le territoire, dont la situation ne peut être comparée à celle d'autres personnes ayant choisi de s'installer à l'étranger (mutatis mutandis, Efe c. Autriche, no 9134/06, §§ 52 et 53, 8 janvier 2013).