Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MASA INVEST GROUP v. UKRAINE

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

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 22.03.2001 - 34044/96

  Schießbefehl

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 3540/03

  In this connection, the Court reiterates that it is primarily for the national authorities, notably the courts, to interpret and apply domestic law and to establish the facts of the case (see Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany [GC], nos. 34044/96, 35532/97 and 44801/98, § 49, ECHR 2001-II).
• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 3540/03

  Attaining absolute precision in the framing of laws is impossible (see the Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (No. 1), judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 31, § 49).
• EGMR, 08.07.1986 - 9006/80

  LITHGOW AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 3540/03

  The Court recalls that the phrase "subject to the conditions provided for by law" requires the existence of, and compliance with, adequately accessible and sufficiently precise domestic legal provisions (see Lithgow and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 102, p. 47, § 110).

 
• EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 11855/85

  H?KANSSON AND STURESSON v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 3540/03

  However, the Court reiterates that its power to review compliance with domestic law is limited (see, inter alia, Fredin v. Sweden (no. 1), judgment of 18 February 1991, Series A no. 192, p. 16, § 50, with further reference to Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171, p. 16, § 47).
• EGMR, 18.02.1991 - 12033/86

  FREDIN c. SUÈDE (N° 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 3540/03

  However, the Court reiterates that its power to review compliance with domestic law is limited (see, inter alia, Fredin v. Sweden (no. 1), judgment of 18 February 1991, Series A no. 192, p. 16, § 50, with further reference to Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171, p. 16, § 47).
• EGMR, 22.02.1994 - 12954/87

  RAIMONDO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 3540/03

  The Court considers that this interference constituted a control of the use of property in the general interest "to secure the payment of taxes", within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see AGOSI v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 24 October 1986, Series A no. 108, p. 17, § 51, and Raimondo v. Italy, judgment of 22 February 1994, Series A no. 281-A, p. 16, § 29).
• EGMR, 24.10.1986 - 9118/80

  AGOSI c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 3540/03

  The Court considers that this interference constituted a control of the use of property in the general interest "to secure the payment of taxes", within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see AGOSI v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 24 October 1986, Series A no. 108, p. 17, § 51, and Raimondo v. Italy, judgment of 22 February 1994, Series A no. 281-A, p. 16, § 29).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 06.12.2018 - C-566/17

  Zwiazek Gmin Zaglebia Miedziowego - Vorlage zur Vorabentscheidung - Gemeinsames …

  65 EGMR, 29. Januar 2003, Masa Invest Group/Ukraine (CE:ECHR:2005:1011DEC000354003, S. 12).

  72 EGMR, 29. Januar 2003, Masa Invest Group/Ukraine (CE:ECHR:2005:1011DEC000354003, S. 12 und 13).