Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2012,55648
EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,55648)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 16.10.2012 - 10781/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,55648)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 16. Oktober 2012 - 10781/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,55648)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,55648) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (15)

  • EGMR, 27.07.2004 - 55480/00

    SIDABRAS ET DZIAUTAS c. LITUANIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    55480/00 and 59330/00, §§ 46-47, ECHR 2004-VIII, the Court concluded that notwithstanding its approach in Vogt and Thlimmenos, the far-reaching ban on former KGB agents taking up private sector employment, at issue in the case, did affect "private life" such as to engage Article 8. It noted in this context that the ban had created serious difficulties for them in terms of earning their living, with obvious repercussions on the enjoyment of their private lives, and that the publicity caused by the ban and its application to them had caused them to suffer constant embarrassment and had impeded their establishment of contacts with the outside world (§§ 48-49. See also the Court's recent judgment in D.M.T. and D.K.I. v. Bulgaria, no. 29476/06, § 103, 24 July 2012 (not yet final)).
  • EGMR, 23.03.2006 - 77924/01

    ALBANESE c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    Similarly, in Albanese v. Italy, no. 77924/01, § 54, 23 March 2006, the Court concluded that a number of limitations imposed on the activities of the applicant as a result of his bankruptcy influenced his ability to develop relationships with the outside world and that Article 8 was accordingly engaged.
  • EGMR, 11.04.2006 - 56550/00

    MÓLKA v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    In Mólka v. Poland (dec.), no. 56550/00, ECHR 2006-IV, the Court raised of its own motion a complaint under Article 8 in the context of facilities at a polling station not adapted to suit those in wheelchairs which had prevented the applicant from exercising his right to vote in municipal elections (to which Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 did not apply).
  • EGMR, 12.04.2006 - 65731/01

    STEC ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    65731/01 and 65900/01, § 48, ECHR 2005-X; and Austin and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos.
  • EGMR, 19.04.2007 - 63235/00

    VILHO ESKELINEN AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    Article 8 does not, for example, guarantee a right of recruitment to the civil service (see Vogt v. Germany, 26 September 1995, § 43, Series A no. 323; and Vilho Eskelinen and Others v. Finland [GC], no. 63235/00, § 57, ECHR 2007-II) or a right to freedom of profession (see Thlimmenos v. Greece [GC], no. 34369/97, § 41, ECHR 2000-IV).
  • EGMR, 04.12.2008 - 30562/04

    S. und Marper ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    The notion of "private life" in Article 8 is a broad term not susceptible to exhaustive definition (see, among many other authorities, Niemietz v. Germany, 16 December 1992, § 29, Series A no. 251-B; and S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04, § 66, ECHR 2008).
  • EGMR, 28.04.2009 - 39311/05

    KARAKO v. HUNGARY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    In Karakó v. Hungary, no. 39311/05, § 28, 28 April 2009, the Court concluded that the applicant's allegation that his reputation as a politician had been harmed by the impugned publication was not a sustainable claim regarding the protection of his right to respect for personal integrity under Article 8 of the Convention, as he had failed to demonstrate that the allegations in the publication were of such a seriously offensive nature that their publication had an inevitable direct effect on the applicant's private life.
  • EGMR, 04.06.2009 - 21277/05

    STANDARD VERLAGS GMBH v. AUSTRIA (No. 2)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    Thus in Von Hannover v. Germany, no. 59320/00, § 64, ECHR 2004-VI, the Court reiterated that in certain special circumstances the public's right to be informed could even extend to aspects of the private life of public figures, particularly where politicians were concerned (see also Standard Verlags GmbH v. Austria (no. 2), no. 21277/05 § 48, 4 June 2009; Von Hannover (no. 2), cited above, § 110; and Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 91, 7 February 2012).
  • EGMR, 12.10.2010 - 184/06

    SAARISTO AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    In Lahtonen v. Finland, no. 29576/09, § 66, 17 January 2012, it reiterated that the limits of permissible criticism in the context of defamation complaints were wider as regards a politician than as regards a private individual (see also Lingens v. Austria, 8 July 1986, § 42, Series A no. 103; and Saaristo and Others v. Finland, no. 184/06, § 59, 12 October 2010).
  • EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 29576/09

    LAHTONEN v. FINLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 16.10.2012 - 10781/10
    In Lahtonen v. Finland, no. 29576/09, § 66, 17 January 2012, it reiterated that the limits of permissible criticism in the context of defamation complaints were wider as regards a politician than as regards a private individual (see also Lingens v. Austria, 8 July 1986, § 42, Series A no. 103; and Saaristo and Others v. Finland, no. 184/06, § 59, 12 October 2010).
  • EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08

    Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie

  • EGMR, 15.03.2012 - 39692/09

    AUSTIN ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  • EGMR, 26.09.1995 - 17851/91

    Radikalenerlaß

  • EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13710/88

    NIEMIETZ v. GERMANY

  • EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 34369/97

    THLIMMENOS c. GRECE

  • EGMR, 14.12.2023 - 40119/21

    M.L. v. POLAND

    "The Court has consistently held, moreover, that it is not for Article 8, however broad its scope, to fill an alleged gap in fundamental rights protection which results from the decision of the respondent State to exercise the possibility, in accordance with international law, not to provide a particular substantive right (see, mutatis mutandis, Misick v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 10781/10, 16 October 2012).".
  • EGMR, 07.06.2016 - 33160/04

    SAHIN KUS c. TURQUIE

    La Cour a noté sur ce point que l'interdiction avait engendré pour les requérants de graves difficultés quant à leurs possibilités de gagner leur vie, avec des répercussions évidentes sur leur vie privée, et que la publicité provoquée par l'interdiction et de l'application de celle-ci à leur égard les avait mis dans l'embarras de façon constante et les avait empêchés de nouer des contacts avec le monde extérieur (§§ 48-49) (voir Misick c. Royaume-Uni (déc.), no 10781/10, § 25, 16 octobre 2012).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht