Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VIG v. HUNGARY

  Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  VIG v. HUNGARY

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. b, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 16.07.1971 - 2614/65

  RINGEISEN v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.01.2021 - 59648/13

  At the same time, there is a need to apply the rule on exhaustion with some degree of flexibility and without excessive formalism, given the context of protecting human rights (see Ringeisen v. Austria, 16 July 1971, § 89, Series A no. 13).
• EGMR, 15.03.2012 - 39692/09

  AUSTIN ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.01.2021 - 59648/13

  The difference between deprivation of and restriction upon liberty is one of degree or intensity, and not of nature or substance (see Austin and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39692/09 and 2 others, § 57, ECHR 2012).

• EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 215/19

  Diskriminierung: Deutschland hat Racial-Profiling-Vorwurf nicht genug geprüft

  his clothing and his personal belongings amounted to an interference with the right to respect for private life (see Gillan and Quinton, cited above, § 63, and Vig v. Hungary, no. 59648/13, § 49, 14 January 2021).
• EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 34085/17

  MUHAMMAD v. SPAIN

  In particular, the Court has found that the use of coercive powers conferred by legislation to require an individual to submit to an identity check and a detailed search of his person, his clothing and his personal belongings amounted to an interference with the right to respect for private life (see Gillan and Quinton v. the United Kingdom, no. 4158/05, § 63, ECHR 2010 (extracts), and Vig v. Hungary, no. 59648/13, § 49, 14 January 2021).
• EGMR, 14.11.2023 - 24074/19

  CANAVCI AND OTHERS v. TÜRKIYE

  This being so, it considers that, in the circumstances of the present case, the adoption of the impugned measures against the applicants, which were enforced for a limited period during the state of emergency, was liable to be arbitrary and incompatible with the requirement of lawfulness (see, mutatis mutandis, Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 81, 10 March 2009, and Vig v. Hungary, no. 59648/13, § 62, 14 January 2021).
• EGMR, 21.03.2023 - 66763/17

  TELEK ET AUTRES c. TÜRKIYE

  Par conséquent, elle considère que dans les circonstances de l'espèce, l'adoption de la mesure litigieuse contre les requérants par des actes de l'exécutif édictés dans le cadre de l'état d'urgence était susceptible d'arbitraire et incompatible avec la condition de légalité (voir, mutatis mutandis, Bykov c. Russie [GC], no 4378/02, § 81, 10 mars 2009, et Vig c. Hongrie, no 59648/13, § 62, 14 janvier 2021).