Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2012,15850
EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,15850)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 17.04.2012 - 31925/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,15850)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 17. April 2012 - 31925/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,15850)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,15850) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    GRUDIC v. SERBIA

    Art. 35, Art. 41, Art. 46, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
    Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) Respondent State to take measures of a general character (Article 46 - General measures) Pecuniary and ...

Sonstiges

Verfahrensgang

 
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 ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (16)

  • EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 39221/98

    SCOZZARI ET GIUNTA c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    Given these provisions, it follows, inter alia, that a judgment in which the Court finds a breach imposes on the respondent State a legal obligation not just to pay those concerned any sums awarded by way of just satisfaction, but also to choose, subject to supervision by the Committee of Ministers, the general and/or, if appropriate, individual measures to be adopted in their domestic legal order to put an end to the violation found by the Court and to redress, in so far as possible, the effects thereof (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII).
  • EGMR, 12.10.2000 - 43440/98

    JANKOVIC c. CROATIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, among other authorities, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Kuna v. Germany (dec.), no. 52449/99, ECHR 2001-V (extracts); Lenz v. Germany (dec.), no. 40862/98, ECHR 2001-X; Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, § 36, 22 October 2009; Wieczorek v. Poland, no. 18176/05, § 57, 8 December 2009; Poulain v. France (dec.), no. 52273/08, 8 February 2011; and Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
  • EGMR, 10.04.2001 - 52449/99

    KUNA v. GERMANY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, among other authorities, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Kuna v. Germany (dec.), no. 52449/99, ECHR 2001-V (extracts); Lenz v. Germany (dec.), no. 40862/98, ECHR 2001-X; Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, § 36, 22 October 2009; Wieczorek v. Poland, no. 18176/05, § 57, 8 December 2009; Poulain v. France (dec.), no. 52273/08, 8 February 2011; and Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
  • EGMR, 27.09.2001 - 40862/98

    Minderung des Vorruhestandsgeldes durch den Vertrag über die Herstellung der

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, among other authorities, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Kuna v. Germany (dec.), no. 52449/99, ECHR 2001-V (extracts); Lenz v. Germany (dec.), no. 40862/98, ECHR 2001-X; Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, § 36, 22 October 2009; Wieczorek v. Poland, no. 18176/05, § 57, 8 December 2009; Poulain v. France (dec.), no. 52273/08, 8 February 2011; and Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
  • EGMR, 28.04.2009 - 38886/05

    RASMUSSEN v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    The reduction or the discontinuance of a pension may therefore constitute an interference with peaceful enjoyment of possessions that needs to be justified (see Kjartan Ásmundsson, cited above, § 40; Rasmussen v. Poland, no. 38886/05, § 71, 28 April 2009; and Wieczorek, cited above, § 57).
  • EGMR, 16.03.2010 - 42184/05

    CARSON ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    However, where a Contracting State has in force legislation providing for the payment as of right of a pension - whether or not conditional on the prior payment of contributions - that legislation has to be regarded as generating a proprietary interest falling within the ambit of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 for persons satisfying its requirements (see Carson and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 42184/05, § 64, ECHR 2010-...).
  • EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 52273/08

    POULAIN c. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, among other authorities, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Kuna v. Germany (dec.), no. 52449/99, ECHR 2001-V (extracts); Lenz v. Germany (dec.), no. 40862/98, ECHR 2001-X; Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, § 36, 22 October 2009; Wieczorek v. Poland, no. 18176/05, § 57, 8 December 2009; Poulain v. France (dec.), no. 52273/08, 8 February 2011; and Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
  • EKMR, 16.12.1974 - 5849/72

    MÜLLER v. AUSTRIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, among other authorities, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Kuna v. Germany (dec.), no. 52449/99, ECHR 2001-V (extracts); Lenz v. Germany (dec.), no. 40862/98, ECHR 2001-X; Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, § 36, 22 October 2009; Wieczorek v. Poland, no. 18176/05, § 57, 8 December 2009; Poulain v. France (dec.), no. 52273/08, 8 February 2011; and Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
  • EKMR, 04.03.1985 - 10671/83

    T. v. SWEDEN

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, among other authorities, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Kuna v. Germany (dec.), no. 52449/99, ECHR 2001-V (extracts); Lenz v. Germany (dec.), no. 40862/98, ECHR 2001-X; Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, § 36, 22 October 2009; Wieczorek v. Poland, no. 18176/05, § 57, 8 December 2009; Poulain v. France (dec.), no. 52273/08, 8 February 2011; and Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
  • EGMR, 31.01.1986 - 8734/79

    BARTHOLD v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08
    The requisite balance will not be found if the person or persons concerned have had to bear an individual and excessive burden (see James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 50, Series A no. 98; and Wieczorek, cited above, §§ 59-60, with further references).
  • EGMR, 19.03.1991 - 11069/84

    CARDOT c. FRANCE

  • EGMR, 02.08.1984 - 8691/79

    MALONE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  • EGMR, 08.07.1986 - 9006/80

    LITHGOW AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  • EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7654/76

    VAN OOSTERWIJCK c. BELGIQUE

  • EGMR, 23.11.1983 - 8919/80

    VAN DER MUSSELE c. BELGIQUE

  • EGMR, 07.07.2011 - 37452/02

    STUMMER c. AUTRICHE

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