Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BUKHARATYAN v. ARMENIA

  Art. 9, Art. 9 Abs. 1, Art. 9 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 9 Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Bukharatyan v. Armenia

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 44774/98

  LEYLA SAHIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 37819/03

  That freedom entails, inter alia, freedom to hold or not to hold religious beliefs and to practise or not to practise a religion (see Kokkinakis v. Greece, 25 May 1993, § 31, Series A no. 260-A; Buscarini and Others, cited above, § 34; and Leyla Sahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 44774/98, § 104, ECHR 2005-XI).
• EGMR, 25.05.1993 - 14307/88

  KOKKINAKIS c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 37819/03

  That freedom entails, inter alia, freedom to hold or not to hold religious beliefs and to practise or not to practise a religion (see Kokkinakis v. Greece, 25 May 1993, § 31, Series A no. 260-A; Buscarini and Others, cited above, § 34; and Leyla Sahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 44774/98, § 104, ECHR 2005-XI).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30985/96

  HASSAN ET TCHAOUCH c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 37819/03

  Article 9 lists a number of forms which manifestation of one's religion or belief may take, namely worship, teaching, practice and observance (see Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 30985/96, § 60, ECHR 2000-XI, and Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova, no. 45701/99, § 114, ECHR 2001-XII).
• EGMR, 18.02.1999 - 24645/94

  BUSCARINI ET AUTRES c. SAINT-MARIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 37819/03

  Such interference will be contrary to Article 9 unless it is "prescribed by law", pursues one or more of the legitimate aims set out in paragraph 2 and is "necessary in a democratic society" (see, among other authorities, Buscarini and Others v. San Marino [GC], no. 24645/94, § 34, ECHR 1999-I).

• EGMR, 17.10.2019 - 14604/08

  MUSHFIG MAMMADOV ET AUTRES c. AZERBAÏDJAN

  Quant à l'argument du Gouvernement relatif à l'applicabilité de l'article 9 de la Convention à l'égard des requérants des requêtes nos 14604/08 et 45823/11, la Cour rappelle avoir examiné un argument identique à celui présentement formulé devant elle et avoir, à cette occasion, conclu à l'applicabilité de cette disposition (Tsaturyan c. Arménie, no 37821/03, §§ 29-32, 10 janvier 2012, et Bukharatyan c. Arménie, no 37819/03, §§ 33-36, 10 janvier 2012).