Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NATIONAL MOVEMENT EKOGLASNOST v. BULGARIA

  Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  NATIONAL MOVEMENT EKOGLASNOST v. BULGARIA

  Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 73049/01

  Budweiser-Streit

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2020 - 31678/17

  The second and third rules are concerned with particular instances of interference with the right to peaceful enjoyment of property and should therefore be construed in the light of the general principle enunciated in the first rule" (see Anheuser-Busch Inc. v. Portugal [GC], no. 73049/01, § 62, ECHR 2007-I, with further references).
• EGMR, 14.05.2020 - 66581/12

  KOSTOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2020 - 31678/17

  66581/12 and 25054/15, §§ 77 and 86, 14 May 2020).
• EGMR, 30.03.2004 - 53984/00

  RADIO FRANCE ET AUTRES c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2020 - 31678/17

  The Court's assessment 61. The Court observes that a legal entity "claiming to be the victim of a violation by one of the High Contracting Parties of the rights set forth in the Convention and the Protocols thereto" may submit an application to it, provided that it is a non-governmental organisation within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention (Radio France and Others v. France (dec.), no. 53984/00, § 26, ECHR 2003-X (extracts).

• EGMR, 24.10.2023 - 53285/15

  ZAGORSKA v. BULGARIA

  This sum does not appear excessive, seeing the undeniable complexity of a forfeiture case (contrast, for example, National Movement Ekoglasnost v. Bulgaria, no. 31678/17, § 82, 15 December 2020, where the Court criticised as excessive the order for the applicant association to pay the equivalent of about EUR 6, 000 for the legal representation of an opposing party in reopening proceedings raising merely procedural issues), and the fact that the sum was awarded for three levels of jurisdiction (compare in that regard the considerations in Hoare v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 16261/08, § 60, 12 April 2011).
• EGMR, 24.02.2022 - 32604/20

  BOSNIC v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive legal costs imposed on a party to civil proceedings (see, for example, Cindric and Beslic v. Croatia, no. 72152/13, §§ 91-92, 98 and 108-111, 6 September 2016; Musa Tarhan v. Turkey, no. 12055/17, §§ 71-72, 74-75 and 88-89, 23 October 2018; and National Movement Ekoglasnost v. Bulgaria, no. 31678/17, §§ 68-71, 75 and 83-84, 15 December 2020).
• EGMR, 12.09.2023 - 67568/16

  CENTRE FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING v. BULGARIA

  A costs order requiring a party to proceedings to reimburse other parties' costs and expenses interferes with the "possessions" of the litigant against whom it is made (see Cindric and Beslic v. Croatia, no. 72152/13, § 92, 6 September 2016, and National Movement Ekoglasnost v. Bulgaria, no. 31678/17, § 71, 15 December 2020).