Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MATA ESTEVEZ contre l'ESPAGNE

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 14, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MATA ESTEVEZ v. SPAIN

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 14, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EKMR, 03.05.1983 - 9369/81

  X. and Y. v. the UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 56501/00

  As regards establishing whether the decision in question concerns the sphere of "family life" within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention, the Court reiterates that, according to the established case-law of the Convention institutions, long-term homosexual relationships between two men do not fall within the scope of the right to respect for family life protected by Article 8 of the Convention (see X. and Y. v. the United Kingdom, application no. 9369/81, Commission decision of 3 May 1983, Decisions and Reports (DR) 32, p. 220, and S. v. the United Kingdom, application no. 11716/85, Commission decision of 14 May 1986, DR 47, p. 274).
• EKMR, 14.05.1986 - 11716/85

  S. v. the UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 56501/00

  As regards establishing whether the decision in question concerns the sphere of "family life" within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention, the Court reiterates that, according to the established case-law of the Convention institutions, long-term homosexual relationships between two men do not fall within the scope of the right to respect for family life protected by Article 8 of the Convention (see X. and Y. v. the United Kingdom, application no. 9369/81, Commission decision of 3 May 1983, Decisions and Reports (DR) 32, p. 220, and S. v. the United Kingdom, application no. 11716/85, Commission decision of 14 May 1986, DR 47, p. 274).
• EGMR, 27.09.1990 - 10843/84

  COSSEY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 56501/00

  The Court considers that, despite the growing tendency in a number of European States towards the legal and judicial recognition of stable de facto partnerships between homosexuals, this is, given the existence of little common ground between the Contracting States, an area in which they still enjoy a wide margin of appreciation (see, mutatis mutandis, the Cossey v. the United Kingdom judgment of 27 September 1990, Series A no. 184, p. 16, § 40, and, a contrario, Smith and Grady v. the United Kingdom, nos. 33985/96 and 33986/96, § 104, ECHR 1999-VI).
• EGMR, 13.06.1979 - 6833/74

  MARCKX v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 56501/00

  In the instant case the Court notes that Spanish legislation relating to eligibility for survivors" allowances does have a legitimate aim, which is the protection of the family based on marriage bonds (see, mutatis mutandis, the Marckx v. Belgium judgment of 13 June 1979, Series A no. 31, § 40).

• EGMR, 24.06.2010 - 30141/04

  SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA

  Spain (dec.), no. 56501/00, ECHR 2001-VI, with further references).
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 40016/98

  KARNER c. AUTRICHE

  The Court can accept that protection of the family in the traditional sense is, in principle, a weighty and legitimate reason which might justify a difference in treatment (see Mata Estevez v. Spain (dec.), no. 56501/00, ECHR 2001-VI, with further references).
• EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13

  PAJIC v. CROATIA

  The Court notes at the outset that there is no doubt that the relationship of a same-sex couple like the applicants" falls within the notion of "private life" within the meaning of Article 8 (see, for example, Mata Estevez v. Spain (dec.), no. 56501/00, ECHR 2001-VI).

 
• EGMR, 22.07.2010 - 18984/02

  P.B. AND J.S. v. AUSTRIA

  In coming to that conclusion, the Court observed that despite the growing tendency in a number of European States towards the legal and judicial recognition of stable de facto partnerships between homosexuals, given the existence of little common ground between the Contracting States, this was an area in which they still enjoyed a wide margin of appreciation (see Mata Estevez v. Spain (dec.), no. 56501/00, ECHR 2001-VI, with further references).
• EGMR, 14.06.2016 - 35214/09

  ALDEGUER TOMÁS v. SPAIN

  The Constitutional Court followed the same approach in its decision of 21 October 1999 in the case of Mata Estevez v. Spain ((dec.), no. 56501/00, ECHR 2001-VI), in which it declared the amparo appeal inadmissible on the grounds that it was ill-founded.
• EGMR, 28.09.2010 - 37060/06

  J.M. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Lord Justice Sedley considered that the applicant's previous family life (i.e. the relationship between herself, her former husband and her children) was not within the ambit of Article 8. As for her relationship with her partner, he read the decision of the European Court in Mata Estevez v. Spain (dec.), no. 56501/00, ECHR 2001-VI as establishing that the question whether same-sex relationships fall within Article 8 is a matter of domestic law.
• VG Göttingen, 25.08.2023 - 1 B 31/23

  Abschiebung; Faktischer Inländer; Istanbul-Konvention; Positivstaatler; Recht auf …

  v. 10.05.2001 - 56501/00 -, (M. ./. N.) BeckRS 2001, 165348 Rn. 13).
• EGMR, 21.09.2010 - 66686/09

  MANENC c. FRANCE

  Dans ces conditions, une relation affective et sexuelle telle que celle que le requérant affirme avoir vécu durant de nombreuses années relève de sa vie privée au sens du premier alinéa de cette disposition (Antonio Mata Estevez c. Espagne (déc.), no 56501/00, 10 mai 2001).