Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TANEVA & OTHERS v. \

  Art. 6, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 07.01.2003 - 44912/98

  KOPECKÝ v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.11.2009 - 11363/03

  On the other hand, once a Contracting State, having ratified the Convention including Protocol No. 1, enacts legislation providing for the full or partial restoration of property confiscated under a previous regime, such legislation may be regarded as generating a new property right protected by Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 for persons satisfying the requirements for entitlement (see Kopecký v. Slovakia [GC], no. 44912/98, § 35, ECHR 2004-IX).
• EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 33244/02

  GAVELLA c. CROATIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.11.2009 - 11363/03

  Accordingly, a conditional claim cannot be considered an asset (see Gavella v. Croatia (dec.), no. 33244/02, ECHR 2006-XII, and the references cited therein).

• EGMR, 05.09.2023 - 73016/17

  ANGELESKI AND OTHERS v. NORTH MACEDONIA

  Having regard to the information before it and in view of its limited power to deal with alleged errors of fact or law committed by the domestic courts, the Court cannot substitute its view for that of the Administrative and Higher Administrative Courts concerning the character of the expropriated land at the time of the expropriation (compare also Jantner v. Slovakia, no. 39050/97, § 32, 4 March 2003, and Taneva and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 11363/03, 10 November 2009).
• EGMR, 27.05.2014 - 45482/08

  JOVEVSKI v.

  Furthermore, the applicant did not avail himself of the remedies available for the acceleration of the proceedings in the event of administrative inactivity (see Taneva and others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 11363/03, ECHR 10 November 2009).