Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
In Nachschlagewerken
- Wikipedia (Wikipedia-Eintrag mit Bezug zur Entscheidung)
Diego Garcia
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (3) Neu Zitiert selbst (11)
- EGMR, 19.09.2006 - 15305/06
QUARK FISHING LTD. c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
Insofar as the applicants argued that the United Kingdom was liable for events occurring in BIOT because it exercised effective control over the territory, the Government relied on the Court's jurisprudence to the effect that the only means by which a State's responsibility under the Convention could be engaged for a territory, for whose international relations it was responsible, was by means of a notification under Article 56 (referring to Quark Fishing Ltd v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 15305/06, ECHR 2006-XIV).The existence of this mechanism, which was included in the Convention for historical reasons, cannot be interpreted in present conditions as limiting the scope of the term "jurisdiction" in Article 1. The situations covered by the "effective control" principle are clearly separate and distinct from circumstances where a Contracting State has not, through a declaration under Article 56, extended the Convention or any of its Protocols to an overseas territory for whose international relations it is responsible (see Loizidou (preliminary objections), cited above, §§ 86-89 and Quark Fishing Ltd v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 15305/06, ECHR 2006-...).".
- EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 50887/99
YONGHONG v. PORTUGAL
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
The applicants" situation differed from that of the applicants in Bui Van Thanh and Others v. the United Kingdom (no. 16137/90, Commission decision of 12 March 1990), in which the Commission held that the mere fact that the acts of the Hong Kong authorities under Hong Kong immigration law had been based on United Kingdom policy was insufficient to amount to an exercise of the latter's Article 1 "jurisdiction" and in Yonghong v. Portugal (no. 50887/99, Commission decision of 25 November 1999), where the final decision to allow the applicant's extradition to proceed lay with the Macanese authorities and not the Portuguese courts.It referred to constant case-law to the effect that no jurisdiction arose where a Contracting State had not, through a declaration under Article 56 (former Article 63), extended the Convention or any of its Protocols to an overseas territory for whose international relations it was responsible (see Gillow v. the United Kingdom, 24 November 1986, § 62, Series A no. 109; Bui Van Thanh and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 16137/90, Commission decision of 12 March 1990, Decisions and Reports 65, p. 330; and Yonghong v. Portugal (dec.), no. 50887/99, ECHR 1999-IX).
- EKMR, 12.03.1990 - 16137/90
BUI VAN THANH ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
The applicants" situation differed from that of the applicants in Bui Van Thanh and Others v. the United Kingdom (no. 16137/90, Commission decision of 12 March 1990), in which the Commission held that the mere fact that the acts of the Hong Kong authorities under Hong Kong immigration law had been based on United Kingdom policy was insufficient to amount to an exercise of the latter's Article 1 "jurisdiction" and in Yonghong v. Portugal (no. 50887/99, Commission decision of 25 November 1999), where the final decision to allow the applicant's extradition to proceed lay with the Macanese authorities and not the Portuguese courts.It referred to constant case-law to the effect that no jurisdiction arose where a Contracting State had not, through a declaration under Article 56 (former Article 63), extended the Convention or any of its Protocols to an overseas territory for whose international relations it was responsible (see Gillow v. the United Kingdom, 24 November 1986, § 62, Series A no. 109; Bui Van Thanh and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 16137/90, Commission decision of 12 March 1990, Decisions and Reports 65, p. 330; and Yonghong v. Portugal (dec.), no. 50887/99, ECHR 1999-IX).
- EGMR, 01.03.2010 - 46113/99
Demopoulos ./. Türkei und 7 andere
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
As to the former point, the Court would note, first of all, that those applicants who were not born on the islands and never had a home on the islands, can have no claim to victim status arising out of those events and their immediate aftermath (see, mutatis mutandis, Demopoulos and Others v. Turkey [GC] no. 46113/99 et al, decision of 1 March 2010, ECHR 2010-...; § 136 and the cases cited therein, Papayianni and Others v. Turkey, no. 479/07 et al, decision of 6 July 2010; and the cases cited therein). - EGMR, 17.10.2000 - 41894/98
HAY contre le ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
The Court would reiterate that the possibility of obtaining compensation in civil proceedings for the claims of breaches of the rights invoked in the present case will generally, and in normal circumstances, constitute an adequate and sufficient remedy Where applicants accept a sum of compensation in settlement of civil claims and renounce further use of local remedies therefore, they will generally no longer be able to claim to be a victim in respect of those matters (see application nos. 5577-5583/72, Donnelly and Others v. the United Kingdom, dec. 15.12.75, DR 4 p. 4 at pp. 86-87, Caraher v. the United Kingdom, (dec.), no. 24520/94, ECHR 2000-I; Hay v. the United Kingdom, (dec.) no. 41894/98, ECHR 2000-XI). - EKMR, 05.04.1973 - 5577/72
DONNELLY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
The Court would reiterate that the possibility of obtaining compensation in civil proceedings for the claims of breaches of the rights invoked in the present case will generally, and in normal circumstances, constitute an adequate and sufficient remedy Where applicants accept a sum of compensation in settlement of civil claims and renounce further use of local remedies therefore, they will generally no longer be able to claim to be a victim in respect of those matters (see application nos. 5577-5583/72, Donnelly and Others v. the United Kingdom, dec. 15.12.75, DR 4 p. 4 at pp. 86-87, Caraher v. the United Kingdom, (dec.), no. 24520/94, ECHR 2000-I; Hay v. the United Kingdom, (dec.) no. 41894/98, ECHR 2000-XI). - EGMR, 11.01.2000 - 24520/94
CARAHER contre le ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
The Court would reiterate that the possibility of obtaining compensation in civil proceedings for the claims of breaches of the rights invoked in the present case will generally, and in normal circumstances, constitute an adequate and sufficient remedy Where applicants accept a sum of compensation in settlement of civil claims and renounce further use of local remedies therefore, they will generally no longer be able to claim to be a victim in respect of those matters (see application nos. 5577-5583/72, Donnelly and Others v. the United Kingdom, dec. 15.12.75, DR 4 p. 4 at pp. 86-87, Caraher v. the United Kingdom, (dec.), no. 24520/94, ECHR 2000-I; Hay v. the United Kingdom, (dec.) no. 41894/98, ECHR 2000-XI). - EGMR, 12.12.2001 - 52207/99
V. und B. B., Ž. S., M. S., D. J. und D. S. gegen Belgien, Dänemark, …
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
It may be noted that in Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and Others (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, ECHR 2001-XII the fact that decisions might have been taken and actions planned within Contracting States which had led to the most serious consequences for applicants in Belgrade (then outside Convention space) did not lead to the NATO bombing being brought within the Court's competence. - EGMR, 24.11.1986 - 9063/80
GILLOW v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
It referred to constant case-law to the effect that no jurisdiction arose where a Contracting State had not, through a declaration under Article 56 (former Article 63), extended the Convention or any of its Protocols to an overseas territory for whose international relations it was responsible (see Gillow v. the United Kingdom, 24 November 1986, § 62, Series A no. 109; Bui Van Thanh and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 16137/90, Commission decision of 12 March 1990, Decisions and Reports 65, p. 330; and Yonghong v. Portugal (dec.), no. 50887/99, ECHR 1999-IX). - EGMR, 23.03.1995 - 15318/89
LOIZIDOU c. TURQUIE (EXCEPTIONS PRÉLIMINAIRES)
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 35622/04
As regards the right of individual petition, the applicants submitted that this was distinct from Article 56. Under Article 34 the Contracting Party accepted competence to examine complaints relating to the acts of its own officials acting under its direct authority; the applicants" complaints concerned just that (Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary objections), 23 March 1995, § 88, Series A no. 310). - EGMR, 14.12.2006 - 1398/03
MARKOVIC ET AUTRES c. ITALIE
- EGMR, 28.01.2014 - 11987/11
ABDUL WAHAB KHAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
The mere fact that the applicant availed himself of his right to appeal against the decision to cancel his leave to remain has no direct bearing on whether his complaints relating to the alleged real risk of his ill-treatment, detention and trial in Pakistan fall within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom: it is the subject matter of the applicants" complaints alone that is relevant in this regard (see, mutatis mutandis, Chagos Islanders v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 35622/04, § 63, 11 December 2012). - EGMR, 13.07.2021 - 74989/11
ALI RIZA c. SUISSE
La juridiction s'apprécie par rapport au grief (Chagos Islanders c. Royaume-Uni (déc.), no 35622/04, § 63, 11 décembre 2012). - EGMR, 11.03.2021 - 14296/14
BRANDÃO FREITAS LOBATO c. PORTUGAL
Aux yeux de la Cour, s'il existe incontestablement un lien juridictionnel au sens de l'article 1 de la Convention en ce qui concerne les procédures disciplinaires internes, celui-ci ne saurait s'étendre aux questions procédurales ou matérielles sur lesquelles le CSM a statué, celles-ci se trouvant en dehors de la juridiction du Portugal (voir, à titre de comparaison, Markovic et autres c. Italie (déc.), no 1398/03, 12 juin 2003, Markovic et autres [GC], précité, §§ 49-55, Chagos Islanders c. Royaume-Uni (déc.), no 35622/04, §§ 65-66, 11 décembre 2012, et M.N. et autres c. Belgique (déc.) [GC], no 3599/18, § 123, 5 mai 2020).