Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 12.10.2005 - 73049/01 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ANHEUSER-BUSCH INC. v. PORTUGAL
Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
No violation of P1-1 (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 11.01.2005 - 73049/01
- EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 73049/01
- EGMR, 12.10.2005 - 73049/01
- EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 73049/01
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 20.11.1995 - 19589/92
BRITISH-AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY LTD c. PAYS-BAS
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.10.2005 - 73049/01
Consequently, the company were denied a protected intellectual property right but were not deprived of their existing property" (British-American Tobacco Company Ltd v. the Netherlands, Series A no. 331, judgment of 20 November 1995, opinion of the Commission, p. 37, §§ 71-72).In that connection, we agree with the majority's comments in the section of the judgment which unambiguously states that Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 was applicable, an issue which had never been clearly settled by a decision of the Court (in the British American Tobacco Company Ltd v. the Netherlands, judgment of 20 November 1995, Series A no. 331, after the Commission had expressed the opinion that Article 1 of Protocol No 1 had not been violated, the Court held (§ 91) that it was unnecessary to decide whether the patent application filed by the applicant company in that case constituted a "possession" that came within the scope of the protection afforded by Article 1 of Protocol No. 1).
- EGMR, 10.07.2002 - 39794/98
GRATZINGER ET GRATZINGEROVA c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.10.2005 - 73049/01
Further, the hope that a long-extinguished property right may be revived cannot be regarded as a "possession" within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 either; nor can a conditional claim which has lapsed as a result of a failure to fulfil the condition (Gratzinger and Gratzingerova v. the Czech Republic (dec.) [GC], no. 39794/98, § 69, ECHR 2002-VII). - EGMR, 29.11.1991 - 12742/87
PINE VALLEY DEVELOPMENTS LTD ET AUTRES c. IRLANDE
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.10.2005 - 73049/01
was in a very similar position to that of the applicant company in the Pine Valley case, in which the Court found that the fact that outline planning permission had been granted amounted to a favourable decision as to the principle of the proposed development (Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v. Ireland, judgment of 29 November 1991, Series A no. 222, p. 23, § 51). - EGMR, 08.07.1986 - 9006/80
LITHGOW AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.10.2005 - 73049/01
Ascertaining whether such a balance existed requires an overall examination of the various interests in issue, which may call for an analysis of the compensation terms - if the situation is akin to the taking of property (see, among other authorities, Lithgow and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 102, pp. 50-51, §§ 120 and 121).