Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MALININ v. RUSSIA

  No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life);No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life) ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  MALININ v. RUSSIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

• EGMR, 29.04.2014 - 60092/12

  Z.J. v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.12.2017 - 70135/14

  It follows from these considerations that the Court's task is not to substitute itself for the domestic authorities in the exercise of their responsibilities regarding child custody and access issues, but rather to review, in the light of the Convention, the decisions taken by those authorities in the exercise of their power of appreciation (see Sahin v. Germany [GC], no. 30943/96, § 64, ECHR 2003-VIII; Sommerfeld v. Germany [GC], no. 31871/96, § 62, ECHR 2003-VIII (extracts); C. v. Finland, no. 18249/02, § 52, 9 May 2006; and Z.J. v. Lithuania, no. 60092/12, § 96, 29 April 2014).

• EGMR, 08.06.2023 - 44684/14

  P.N. c. RÉPUBLIQUE TCHÈQUE

  Même si les inquiétudes du requérant se sont révélées fondées et auraient pu être examinées avec plus de considération par les juridictions nationales, il est vrai que le tribunal n'était pas en mesure de conclure qu'il y avait un risque imminent et sérieux que la mère déplace les enfants de manière permanente, et ainsi justifier une mesure aussi radicale que d'interdire aux enfants de quitter le pays jusqu'à leur majorité, comme l'a demandé le requérant (voir, mutatis mutandis, Malinin c. Russie, no 70135/14, § 93, 12 décembre 2017).
• EGMR, 10.04.2018 - 77180/11

  LEONOV v. RUSSIA

  Accordingly, the domestic courts failed to safeguard the Convention right in question adequately, by omitting to duly consider factors that were relevant under the Convention (see, by contrast, Gruzdeva v. Russia (dec.), no. 13553/09, §§ 72-77, 8 July 2014, and Malinin v. Russia, no. 70135/14, § 71, 12 December 2017, where the domestic courts had carefully assessed those and other factors in their decisions).
• EGMR, 22.02.2022 - 22076/20

  VYALSHINA v. RUSSIA

  The Court further notes that the decision at issue was reached following adversarial proceedings in which the applicant was placed in a position enabling her to put forward all arguments in support of her position and she also had access to all relevant information that was relied on by the courts (compare to Cvetkovic v. Serbia, no. 42707/10, §§ 56-65, 7 February 2017; Malinin v. Russia, no. 70135/14, §§ 67-78, 12 December 2017; and Leonov v. Russia, no. 77180/11, §§ 69-77, 10 April 2018).
• EGMR, 22.02.2022 - 46413/18

  SAMOYLOVA v. RUSSIA

  The Court further notes that the decision at issue was reached following adversarial proceedings in which the applicant was placed in a position enabling her to put forward all arguments in support of her position and she also had access to all relevant information that was relied on by the courts (compare to Cvetkovic v. Serbia, no. 42707/10, §§ 56-65, 7 February 2017; Malinin v. Russia, no. 70135/14, §§ 67-78, 12 December 2017; and Leonov v. Russia, no. 77180/11, §§ 69-77, 10 April 2018).