Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  CICHOPEK AND OTHERS v. POLAND

  Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 12.04.2006 - 65731/01

  STEC ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  65731/01 and 65900/01, ECHR 2005-X and to Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; and Carson and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 42184/05, § 64, ECHR 2010).

  65731/01 and 65900/01, § 52, ECHR 2006-VI Carson, cited above, § 61; and Andrejeva, cited above, § 83).

• EGMR, 15.06.1999 - 34610/97

  DOMALEWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  The assessment would vary depending on the particular circumstances of the case and the applicant's personal situation; while a total deprivation of entitlements resulting in the loss of means of subsistence would in principle amount to a violation of the right of property, the imposition of a reasonable and commensurate reduction would not (see, among many other authorities, Domalewski v. Poland (dec.), no. 34610/97, ECHR 1999-V; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Schwengel v. Germany (dec.), no. 52442/99, 2 March 2000; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, §§ 41-42, 22 October 2009; Kjartan Ásmundsson, cited above, § 45; Valkov and Others, cited above, § 97; Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
• EGMR, 28.04.2009 - 38886/05

  RASMUSSEN v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  The reduction or the discontinuance of a pension may therefore constitute interference with possessions that needs to be justified (see Valkov and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 2033/04, 19125/04, 19475/04, 19490/04, 19495/04, 19497/04, 24729/04, 171/05 and 2041/05, § 84, 25 October 2011 with further references, in particular to Rasmussen v. Poland, no. 38886/05, § 71, 28 April 2009; and Panfile v. Romania (dec.), no 13902/11, § 15, 20 March 2012).

 
• EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 13902/11

  PANFILE v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  The reduction or the discontinuance of a pension may therefore constitute interference with possessions that needs to be justified (see Valkov and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 2033/04, 19125/04, 19475/04, 19490/04, 19495/04, 19497/04, 24729/04, 171/05 and 2041/05, § 84, 25 October 2011 with further references, in particular to Rasmussen v. Poland, no. 38886/05, § 71, 28 April 2009; and Panfile v. Romania (dec.), no 13902/11, § 15, 20 March 2012).
• EGMR, 12.10.2000 - 43440/98

  JANKOVIC c. CROATIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  The assessment would vary depending on the particular circumstances of the case and the applicant's personal situation; while a total deprivation of entitlements resulting in the loss of means of subsistence would in principle amount to a violation of the right of property, the imposition of a reasonable and commensurate reduction would not (see, among many other authorities, Domalewski v. Poland (dec.), no. 34610/97, ECHR 1999-V; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Schwengel v. Germany (dec.), no. 52442/99, 2 March 2000; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, §§ 41-42, 22 October 2009; Kjartan Ásmundsson, cited above, § 45; Valkov and Others, cited above, § 97; Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
• EGMR, 02.03.2000 - 52442/99

  SCHWENGEL contre l'ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  The assessment would vary depending on the particular circumstances of the case and the applicant's personal situation; while a total deprivation of entitlements resulting in the loss of means of subsistence would in principle amount to a violation of the right of property, the imposition of a reasonable and commensurate reduction would not (see, among many other authorities, Domalewski v. Poland (dec.), no. 34610/97, ECHR 1999-V; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Schwengel v. Germany (dec.), no. 52442/99, 2 March 2000; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, §§ 41-42, 22 October 2009; Kjartan Ásmundsson, cited above, § 45; Valkov and Others, cited above, § 97; Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
• EGMR, 31.05.2011 - 46286/09

  MAGGIO AND OTHERS v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  46286/09, 52851/08, 53727/08, 54486/08 and 56001/08, § 63, 31 May 2011; and Frimu and 4 other applications v. Romania (dec.), no. 45312/11, 7 February 2012, §§ 42-48).
• EGMR, 12.10.2004 - 60669/00

  KJARTAN ÁSMUNDSSON c. ISLANDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  65731/01 and 65900/01, ECHR 2005-X and to Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; and Carson and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 42184/05, § 64, ECHR 2010).
• EGMR, 18.02.2009 - 55707/00

  Andrejeva ./. Lettland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 15189/10

  If, however, a Contracting State has in force legislation providing for the payment as of right of a pension - whether conditional or not on the prior payment of contributions - that legislation must be regarded as generating a proprietary interest falling within the ambit of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 for persons satisfying its requirements (see Andrejeva v. Latvia [GC], no. 55707/00, § 77, with further references, in particular to Stec v. United Kingdom (dec.), nos.

• EGMR, 21.07.2022 - 48762/19

  BIELINSKI v. POLAND

  15189/10 and 1, 627 others, §§ 68-72, 14 May 2013).

  15189/10 and 1, 627 others, §§ 63-87, 14 May 2013.

• OVG Saarland, 22.03.2012 - 2 B 34/12

  Abschiebungsschutz - Visumserfordernis

  Nachdem der Antragsteller im dagegen eingeleiteten Beschwerdeverfahren auf den Lauf der Begründungsfrist für das Rechtsmittel bis zum 13.1.2012 hingewiesen hatte, untersagte der Senat dem Antragsgegner mit Blick auf die für den 4.1.2012 angekündigte Aufenthaltsbeendigung Ende Dezember 2011 im Wege der Zwischenregelung (§§ 173 VwGO, 570 Abs. 3 ZPO) für die Dauer des Beschwerdeverfahrens, den Antragsteller abzuschieben.(vgl. OVG des Saarlandes, Beschluss vom Beschluss vom 22.12.2011 - 2 B 442/11 -) Ende Januar 2012 wies der Senat auch diese Beschwerde des Antragstellers unter Verweis auf seine Entscheidungen in früheren Verfahren zurück.(vgl. OVG des Saarlandes, Beschluss vom 20.1.2012 - 2 B 442/11 -).
• VG Hamburg, 10.02.2014 - 19 AE 5415/13

  Überstellung Asylsuchender nach Ungarn

  Das als Antrag auf Anordnung der aufschiebenden Wirkung der Klage (19 A 5414/13) verstandene Rechtsschutzbegehren hat keinen Erfolg.

 
• EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 38334/08

  ANCHEV v. BULGARIA

  15189/10 and 1, 627 other applications, § 143, 14 May 2013).
• EGMR, 03.09.2015 - 22588/08

  SÕRO v. ESTONIA

  70665/01 and 74345/01, 7 April 2005; and Zickus v. Lithuania, no. 26652/02, 7 April 2009) as well as lack of access to the information on the basis of which the persons" collaboration with former secret services was established (see Matyjek v. Poland, no. 38184/03, 24 April 2007) or reduction of pensions of the persons concerned (see Cichopek and Others v. Poland (dec.) no. 15189/10 and other applications, 14 May 2013).
• EGMR - 29761/22 (anhängig)

  SALA v. POLAND and 5 other applications

  15189/10 and 1, 627 others, 14 May 2013), Bielinski v. Poland (no. 48762/19, 21 July 2022) and Raboszuk v. Poland (no. 231/22 and 2 other applications, recently communicated).