Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GAUCI AND OTHERS v. MALTA

  Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  GAUCI AND OTHERS v. MALTA

  Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 06.11.2014 - 28177/12

  AZZOPARDI v. MALTA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 57752/16

  The Court further notes that as Malta ratified the Convention on 23 January 1967 (including Protocol No. 1), the Court is competent ratione temporis to examine complaints in so far as they relate to events which took place from 23 January 1967 onwards (ibid; see also Bezzina Wettinger and Others v. Malta, no. 15091/06, § 54, 8 April 2008, and Azzopardi v. Malta, no. 28177/12, § 32, 6 November 2014).

  The Court notes that in similar cases (see, for example, Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, (just satisfaction), no. 2226/10, § 20, 9 July 2013 and Azzopardi v. Malta, no. 28177/12, § 66, 6 November 2014) the sum to be awarded to the applicants was calculated on the basis of the value of the land at the time of the taking, converted to the current value to offset the effects of inflation, plus simple statutory interest applied to the capital progressively adjusted.

• EGMR, 13.02.2018 - 68980/13

  GALEA AND OTHERS v. MALTA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 57752/16

  RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW 29. The relevant domestic law concerning the case is set out in Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta (no. 2226/10, §§ 26-27, 22 November 2011) and Galea and Others v. Malta (no. 68980/13, § 24, 13 February 2018).

  Thus, the Court is empowered to examine the matter (see Almeida Garrett, Mascarenhas Falcão and Others v. Portugal, nos. 29813/96 and 30229/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-I, Vajagic v. Croatia, no. 30431/03, § 23, 20 July 2006, and more recently Galea and Others v. Malta, no. 68980/13, § 30, 13 February 2018).

• EKMR, 08.09.1997 - 30229/96

  J. M.F. ET AUTRES contre le PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 57752/16

  Thus, the Court is empowered to examine the matter (see Almeida Garrett, Mascarenhas Falcão and Others v. Portugal, nos. 29813/96 and 30229/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-I, Vajagic v. Croatia, no. 30431/03, § 23, 20 July 2006, and more recently Galea and Others v. Malta, no. 68980/13, § 30, 13 February 2018).

 
• EGMR, 06.09.2016 - 26771/07

  GERA DE PETRI TESTAFERRATA BONICI GHAXAQ AGAINST MALTA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 57752/16

  The Court reiterates that an applicant is deprived of his or her status as a victim if the national authorities have acknowledged, either expressly or in substance, and then afforded appropriate and sufficient redress for a breach of the Convention (see, for example, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 178-193, ECHR 2006-V; Gera de Petri Testaferrata Bonici Ghaxaq v. Malta, no. 26771/07, § 50, 5 April 2011; and B. Tagliaferro & Sons Limited and Coleiro Brothers Limited v. Malta, nos.
• EGMR, 11.09.2018 - 75225/13

  B. TAGLIAFERRO & SONS LIMITED AND COLEIRO BROTHERS LIMITED v. MALTA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 57752/16

  75225/13 and 77311/13, § 55, 11 September 2018).
• EGMR, 20.07.2006 - 30431/03

  VAJAGIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 57752/16

  Thus, the Court is empowered to examine the matter (see Almeida Garrett, Mascarenhas Falcão and Others v. Portugal, nos. 29813/96 and 30229/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-I, Vajagic v. Croatia, no. 30431/03, § 23, 20 July 2006, and more recently Galea and Others v. Malta, no. 68980/13, § 30, 13 February 2018).

• EGMR, 09.06.2022 - 22008/20

  MARIA AZZOPARDI v. MALTA

  While deprivation of property effected for no reason other than to confer a private benefit on a private party cannot be "in the public interest", the compulsory transfer of property from one individual to another may, depending on the circumstances, constitute a legitimate means of promoting the public interest (see James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 40, Series A no. 98, and Gauci and Others v. Malta, no. 57752/16, § 64, 8 October 2019).

  Similarly, the fact that the property or part thereof is transferred to a third party does not detract from the public interest given that the State has a wide margin of appreciation when implementing economic policies (see, for example, Gauci and Others v. Malta, no. 57752/16, § 65, 8 October 2019).