Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  A.D. AND O.D. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 13, Art. 13+8, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 8 Violation of Art. 13+8 No violation of Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 28680/06
• EGMR, 16.03.2010 - 28680/06
• EGMR, 08.03.2012 - 28680/06

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

• EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13071/87

  EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.03.2010 - 28680/06

  The Court reiterates that it is not normally within its province to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts because, as a general rule, it is for the domestic courts to assess the evidence before them (see, inter alia, Edwards v. the United Kingdom, 16 December 1992, Series A no. 247-B, p. 12, § 34 and Vidal v. Belgium, 22 April 1992, Series A no. 235-B, pp. 32-33, §§ 33-34).
• EGMR, 22.04.1992 - 12351/86

  VIDAL c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.03.2010 - 28680/06

  The Court reiterates that it is not normally within its province to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts because, as a general rule, it is for the domestic courts to assess the evidence before them (see, inter alia, Edwards v. the United Kingdom, 16 December 1992, Series A no. 247-B, p. 12, § 34 and Vidal v. Belgium, 22 April 1992, Series A no. 235-B, pp. 32-33, §§ 33-34).

• EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 23284/04

  BORIS POPOV v. RUSSIA

  It was not suggested that he failed to comply with any formal or procedural requirements (see Francisco v. France (dec.), no. 38945/97, 29 August 2000; see also, mutatis mutandis, T.P. and K.M. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 28945/95, §§ 107-110, ECHR 2001-V (extracts), and A.D. and O.D. v. the United Kingdom, no. 28680/06, §§ 102-104, 16 March 2010).