Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 12.04.2007 - 41909/02 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2007,54681) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BJORKLUND v. FINLAND
Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 25.10.1989 - 10842/84
ALLAN JACOBSSON v. SWEDEN (No. 1)
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.04.2007 - 41909/02
In striking the fair balance thereby required between the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual's fundamental rights, the authorities enjoy a wide margin of appreciation (see, among other authorities, Allan Jacobsson v. Sweden (no. 1), judgment of 25 October 1989, Series A no. 163, § 55). - EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75
SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.04.2007 - 41909/02
The applicants claimed that the circumstances in their case were similar to those in the case of Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden (judgment of 23 September 1982, Series A no. 52) as regards the length of the prohibition on construction. - EGMR, 24.10.1986 - 9118/80
AGOSI c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.04.2007 - 41909/02
However, the three rules are not "distinct" in the sense of being unconnected: the second and the third rules are concerned with particular interferences with the right to peaceful enjoyment of property and should therefore be construed in the light of the general principle enunciated in the first rule (see, among many other authorities, AGOSI v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 24 October 1986, Series A no. 108, p. 17, § 48). - EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92
HOKKANEN v. FINLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.04.2007 - 41909/02
The events prior to 10 May 1990 will nonetheless be taken into account as a background to the issue before the Court (see, inter alia, Hokkanen v. Finland, judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299-A, p. 19, § 53). - EGMR, 21.05.2002 - 28856/95
JOKELA v. FINLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.04.2007 - 41909/02
Finally, although Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 contains no express procedural requirements, the Court's case-law requires the relevant proceedings also to afford the individual a reasonable opportunity of putting his or her case to the responsible authorities for the purpose of effectively challenging the measures interfering with the rights guaranteed by this provision (see, inter alia, Jokela v. Finland, no. 28856/95, § 45, ECHR 2002-IV).