Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 14.05.2002 - 48205/99, 48207/99, 48209/99 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GENTILHOMME, SCHAFF-BENHADJI ET ZEROUKI c. FRANCE
Art. 1, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 14, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 2, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
Violation de l'art. 6-1 en ce qui concerne la durée de la procédure Irrecevable en ce qui concerne les autres griefs tirés de l'art. 6-1 Irrecevable sous l'angle des art. 8 14 et P1-2 Dommage matériel - demande rejetée Préjudice moral - réparation pécuniaire ...
Wird zitiert von ... (16) Neu Zitiert selbst (2)
- EGMR, 13.07.1983 - 8737/79
Zimmermann und Steiner ./. Schweiz
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2002 - 48205/99
La Cour rappelle que, lorsqu'elle constate une violation de la Convention, elle peut accorder le paiement des frais et dépens exposés devant les juridictions nationales « pour prévenir ou faire corriger par celles-ci ladite violation » (voir, par exemple, l'arrêt Zimmermann et Steiner c. Suisse du 13 juillet 1983, série A n° 66, § 36). - EGMR, 19.12.1989 - 9783/82
KAMASINSKI v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2002 - 48205/99
Elle rappelle qu'elle ne reconnaît la validité de ce type d'arrangement que s'il est admissible dans le système juridique dont dépend l'avocat concerné (voir l'arrêt Kamasinski c. Autriche du 19 décembre 1989, série A n° 168, § 115).
- EGMR, 30.06.2005 - 45036/98
Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi ./. Irland
The notion of "jurisdiction" reflects the term's meaning in public international law (see Gentilhomme and Others v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99, and 48209/99, § 20, 14 May 2002; Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and Others (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, §§ 59-61, ECHR 2001-XII; and Assanidze v. Georgia, no. 71503/01, § 137, ECHR 2004-II), so that a State's jurisdictional competence is considered primarily territorial (see Bankovic and Others, § 59), a jurisdiction presumed to be exercised throughout the State's territory (see Ilascu and Others, § 312). - EGMR, 05.03.2020 - 3599/18
Keine Zuständigkeit für aus dem Ausland beantragtes humanitäres Visum, um nach …
104. Thus, the Commission and subsequently the Court concluded that a State was exercising its jurisdiction extraterritorially when, in an area outside its national territory, it exercised public powers such as authority and responsibility in respect of the maintenance of security (see X. and Y. v. Switzerland, cited above; Drozd and Janousek v. France and Spain, 26 June 1992, §§ 91-98, Series A no. 240; Gentilhomme, Schaff-Benhadji and Zerouki v. France, nos. 48205/99 and 2 others, § 20, 14 May 2002; Al-Skeini and Others, cited above, §§ 143-150; and Al-Jedda v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 27021/08, §§ 75-96, ECHR 2011). - EGMR, 16.09.2014 - 29750/09
HASSAN c. ROYAUME-UNI
Thus where, in accordance with custom, treaty or other agreement, authorities of the Contracting State carry out executive or judicial functions on the territory of another State, the Contracting State may be responsible for breaches of the Convention thereby incurred, as long as the acts in question are attributable to it rather than to the territorial State (see Drozd and Janousek, cited above; Gentilhomme and Others v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99 and 48209/99, judgment of 14 May 2002; and also X and Y v. Switzerland, nos. 7289/75 and 7349/76, Commission's admissibility decision of 14 July 1977, DR 9, p. 57).
- EGMR, 12.09.2012 - 10593/08
Recht auf Achtung des Privatlebens und Recht auf Beschwerde; Verhältnis zwischen …
The notion of jurisdiction reflects the meaning given to that term in public international law (see Assanidze v. Georgia, no. 71503/01, § 137, ECHR 2004-II; Gentilhomme and Others v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99 and 48209/99, § 20, 14 May 2002; and Bankovic and Others, cited above, §§ 59-61), such that a State's jurisdiction is primarily territorial (see Al-Skeini and Others, cited above, § 131, and Bankovic and Others, cited above, § 59) and is presumed to be exercised normally throughout the State's territory (see Ilascu and Others, cited above, § 312). - EGMR, 16.12.2020 - 20958/14
Krimkrise
Thus, where, in accordance with custom, treaty or other agreement, authorities of the Contracting State carry out executive or judicial functions on the territory of another State, the Contracting State may be responsible for breaches of the Convention thereby incurred, as long as the acts in question are attributable to it rather than to the territorial State (see Drozd and Janousek, cited above; Gentilhomme and Others v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99 and 48209/99, 14 May 2002; and X. and Y. v Switzerland, nos. 7289/75 and 7349/76, Commission decision of 14 July 1977, DR 9, p. 57).When considering the nature or legal basis of the jurisdiction exercised by the Russian Federation over Crimea at the relevant time, the Court's starting-point is that the concept of "jurisdiction" for the purposes of Article 1 of the Convention must be considered to reflect the term's meaning in public international law (see Gentilhomme and Others v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99 and 48209/99, § 20, 14 May 2002; Bankovic and Others, cited above, §§ 59-61; and Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 137, ECHR 2004-II).
- EGMR, 21.01.2021 - 38263/08
GEORGIA v. RUSSIA (II)
"... the Commission and subsequently the Court concluded that a State was exercising its jurisdiction extraterritorially when, in an area outside its national territory, it exercised public powers such as authority and responsibility in respect of the maintenance of security (see X. and Y. v. Switzerland, cited above; Drozd and Janousek v. France and Spain, 26 June 1992, §§ 91-98, Series A no. 240; Gentilhomme, Schaff-Benhadji and Zerouki v. France, nos. 48205/99 and 2 others, § 20, 14 May 2002; Al-Skeini and Others, cited above, §§ 143-50; and Al-Jedda v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 27021/08, §§ 75-96, ECHR 2011)..." (emphasis added). - EGMR, 16.11.2004 - 31821/96
ISSA AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
The established case-law in this area indicates that the concept of "jurisdiction" for the purposes of Article 1 of the Convention must be considered to reflect the term's meaning in public international law (see Gentilhomme, Schaff-Benhadji and Zerouki v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99 and 48209/99, § 20, 14 May 2002; Bankovic and Others, cited above, §§ 59-61, and Assanidzé v. Georgia, [GC], no. 71503/01, § 137, ECHR 2004 -...). - EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 11138/10
Transnistrien
The Court refers to its case-law to the effect that the concept of "jurisdiction" for the purposes of Article 1 of the Convention must be considered to reflect the term's meaning in public international law (see Gentilhomme and Others v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99 and 48209/99, § 20, judgment of 14 May 2002; Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and Others (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, §§ 59-61, ECHR 2001-XII; and Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 137, ECHR 2004-II). - EGMR, 31.05.2018 - 33234/12
Litauen und Rumänien mitverantwortlich für CIA-Folter
In that regard, the Court would refer to its case-law to the effect that the concept of "jurisdiction" for the purposes of Article 1 of the Convention must be considered to reflect the term's meaning in public international law (see Gentilhomme and Others v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99 and 48209/99, § 20, judgment of 14 May 2002; Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and Others (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, §§ 59-61, ECHR 2001-XII; Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 137, ECHR 2004-II; and Ilascu and Others, cited above, §§ 311-312). - EGMR, 16.06.2015 - 40167/06
SARGSYAN c. AZERBAÏDJAN
The Court refers to its case-law to the effect that the concept of "jurisdiction" for the purposes of Article 1 of the Convention must be considered to reflect the term's meaning in public international law (see Gentilhomme and Others v. France, nos. 48205/99, 48207/99 and 48209/99, § 20, judgment of 14 May 2002; Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and Others (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, §§ 59-61, ECHR 2001-XII; and Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 137, ECHR 2004-II). - EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 5809/08
Der "Kadi"-Moment des EGMR
- EGMR, 31.05.2018 - 46454/11
Litauen und Rumänien mitverantwortlich für CIA-Folter
- EGMR, 19.12.2023 - 42126/15
O.J. AND J.O. v. GEORGIA AND RUSSIA
- EGMR, 14.12.2011 - 13216/05
CHIRAGOV AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA
- EGMR, 14.12.2011 - 40167/06
SARGSYAN c. AZERBAÏDJAN
- EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 43611/02
BELOZOROV v. RUSSIA AND UKRAINE