Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 26957/19 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2021,58) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
KHAN v. DENMARK
No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Expulsion;Article 8-1 - Respect for private life) (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
KHAN v. DENMARK
Wird zitiert von ... (5) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02
Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 26957/19
Article 8 protects the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings and the outside world (see Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 61, ECHR 2002-III) and can sometimes embrace aspects of an individual's social identity (see Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, § 53, ECHR 2002-I). - EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08
Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie …
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 26957/19
40660/08 and 60641/08, § 107, ECHR 2012 and Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 88, 7 February 2012). - EGMR, 07.02.2002 - 53176/99
MIKULIC v. CROATIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 26957/19
Article 8 protects the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings and the outside world (see Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 61, ECHR 2002-III) and can sometimes embrace aspects of an individual's social identity (see Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, § 53, ECHR 2002-I). - EGMR, 14.09.2017 - 41215/14
NDIDI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 26957/19
The Court points out in that regard that, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, although opinions may differ on the outcome of a judgment, "where the balancing exercise has been undertaken by the national authorities in conformity with the criteria laid down in the Court's case-law, the Court would require strong reasons to substitute its view for that of the domestic courts" (see, Levakovic v. Denmark, cited above, § 45; Ndidi v. the United Kingdom, no. 41215/14, § 76, 14 September 2017, and, mutatis mutandis, Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) [GC], nos.
- EGMR, 11.10.2022 - 78630/12
BEELER v. SWITZERLAND
De manière générale, la Cour estime qu'il n'y a pas de « vie familiale ", au sens de l'article 8, entre parents et enfants majeurs s'il n'existe pas d'éléments supplémentaires de dépendance (Slivenko c. Lettonie [GC], no 48321/99, § 97, CEDH 2003-X, A.W. Khan c. Royaume-Uni, no 47486/06, § 32, 12 janvier 2010, Narjis c. Italie, no 57433/15, § 37, 14 février 2019, Khan c. Danemark, no 26957/19, §§ 58 et 80, 12 janvier 2021). - EGMR, 22.02.2022 - 31572/19
HUSSAIN v. DENMARK
The Court finds reason to add that the crimes committed by the applicant, including the final ones leading to the unconditional expulsion order, were such as to have serious consequences for the lives of others (see, for example, Khan v. Denmark, no. 26957/19, § 72, 12 January 2021; Samsonnikov v. Estonia, no. 52178/10, § 89, 3 July 2012; and Salem v. Denmark, cited above, § 66). - EGMR, 01.02.2022 - 16588/20
AHMED v. DENMARK
Moreover, it had serious consequences for the lives of others (see, for example, Khan v. Denmark, no. 26957/19, § 72, 12 January 2021; Samsonnikov v. Estonia, no. 52178/10, § 89, 3 July 2012; and Salem, cited above, § 66). - EGMR, 29.03.2022 - 17803/20
MAVRIC v. DENMARK
The Court finds reason to add that two of the crimes concerned robberies, which had serious consequences for the lives of others (see, for example, Khan v. Denmark, no. 26957/19, § 72, 12 January 2021; Samsonnikov v. Estonia, no. 52178/10, § 89, 3 July 2012; and Salem v. Denmark, no. 77036/11, § 66, 1 December 2016). - EGMR, 22.02.2022 - 20579/20
ABDULJI v. DENMARK
The Court finds reason to add that the crimes committed by the applicant, including the final ones leading to the unconditional expulsion order, were such as to have serious consequences for the lives of others (see, for example, Khan v. Denmark, no. 26957/19, § 72, 12 January 2021; Samsonnikov v. Estonia, no. 52178/10, § 89, 3 July 2012; and Salem v. Denmark, cited above, § 66).