Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 27853/09

According to the Court's well-established case-law the expression "in accordance with the law" requires that the impugned measure should have some basis in domestic law and that the law in question should be accessible to the person concerned - who must moreover be able to foresee its consequences for him or her - and compatible with the rule of law (see, amongst other authorities, The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, § 49, Series A no. 30, and Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, § 27, Series A no. 176-A).

According to the Court's well-established case-law the expression "in accordance with the law" requires that the impugned measure should have some basis in domestic law and that the law in question should be accessible to the person concerned - who must moreover be able to foresee its consequences for him or her - and compatible with the rule of law (see, amongst other authorities, The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, § 49, Series A no. 30, and Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, § 27, Series A no. 176-A).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 27853/09

Moreover, the national courts are entrusted to resolve problems of interpretation and application of domestic legislation as well as rules of general international law or international agreement (see Maumousseau and Washington v. France, no. 39388/05, § 79, 6 December 2007).

Moreover, the national courts are entrusted to resolve problems of interpretation and application of domestic legislation as well as rules of general international law or international agreement (see Maumousseau and Washington v. France, no. 39388/05, § 79, 6 December 2007).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 27853/09

It leaves the Court to review, in the light of the Convention, the decision taken by the national authorities in the exercise of their power of appreciation (see, amongst other authorities, Hokkanen v. Finland, 23 September 1994, § 55, Series A no. 299-A, and, more recently, Neulinger and Shuruk, cited above, § 138), including, inter alia, the observance of the procedural requirements implicitly enshrined by Article 8 of the Convention.

It leaves the Court to review, in the light of the Convention, the decision taken by the national authorities in the exercise of their power of appreciation (see, amongst other authorities, Hokkanen v. Finland, 23 September 1994, § 55, Series A no. 299-A, and, more recently, Neulinger and Shuruk, cited above, § 138), including, inter alia, the observance of the procedural requirements implicitly enshrined by Article 8 of the Convention.

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 27853/09

According to the Court's well-established case-law the expression "in accordance with the law" requires that the impugned measure should have some basis in domestic law and that the law in question should be accessible to the person concerned - who must moreover be able to foresee its consequences for him or her - and compatible with the rule of law (see, amongst other authorities, The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, § 49, Series A no. 30, and Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, § 27, Series A no. 176-A).

According to the Court's well-established case-law the expression "in accordance with the law" requires that the impugned measure should have some basis in domestic law and that the law in question should be accessible to the person concerned - who must moreover be able to foresee its consequences for him or her - and compatible with the rule of law (see, amongst other authorities, The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, § 49, Series A no. 30, and Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, § 27, Series A no. 176-A).