Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ATEV v. BULGARIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 35, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

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

• EGMR, 29.11.1991 - 12742/87

  PINE VALLEY DEVELOPMENTS LTD ET AUTRES c. IRLANDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 39689/05

  While admittedly suing a private individual cannot be regarded as a remedy for the purposes of exhaustion of domestic remedies in respect of an act on the part of the State (see Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v. Ireland, judgment of 29 November 1991, Series A no. 222, p. 22, § 48; and Zlínsat, spol. s r.o., v. Bulgaria, no. 57785/00, § 55, 15 June 2006), the Court sees no reason why it could not be taken into account, together with other relevant factors, in the overall assessment as to whether the necessary balance between the public and private interest was achieved.
• EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75

  SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 39689/05

  In particular, there must be a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be realised (see, among many other authorities, Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, § 69, Series A no. 52).
• EGMR, 24.10.1986 - 9118/80

  AGOSI c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 39689/05

  In this connection, the Court notes that it has recognised that the Contracting States have a wide margin of appreciation when passing laws for the purpose of securing the payment of taxes (see Gasus Dosier- und Fördertechnik GmbH v. the Netherlands, 23 February 1995, § 60, Series A no. 306-B; AGOSI v. the United Kingdom, 24 October 1986, § 52, Series A no. 108; Jokela v. Finland, no. 28856/95, § 57, ECHR 2002-IV; and Bulves AD, cited above, § 63).

 
• EGMR, 25.01.2011 - 26553/05

  NAZAREV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 39689/05

  The Court therefore respects the legislature's assessment unless it is devoid of reasonable foundation (see National & Provincial Building Society, Leeds Permanent Building Society and Yorkshire Building Society v. the United Kingdom, 23 October 1997, §§ 80-82, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VII; Nazarev and Others v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 26553/05 et al., 25 January 2011; and M.A. and 34 Others v. Finland (dec.), no. 27793/95, 10 June 2003).
• EGMR, 10.06.2003 - 27793/95

  M.A. AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 39689/05

  The Court therefore respects the legislature's assessment unless it is devoid of reasonable foundation (see National & Provincial Building Society, Leeds Permanent Building Society and Yorkshire Building Society v. the United Kingdom, 23 October 1997, §§ 80-82, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VII; Nazarev and Others v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 26553/05 et al., 25 January 2011; and M.A. and 34 Others v. Finland (dec.), no. 27793/95, 10 June 2003).
• EGMR, 21.05.2002 - 28856/95

  JOKELA v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 39689/05

  In this connection, the Court notes that it has recognised that the Contracting States have a wide margin of appreciation when passing laws for the purpose of securing the payment of taxes (see Gasus Dosier- und Fördertechnik GmbH v. the Netherlands, 23 February 1995, § 60, Series A no. 306-B; AGOSI v. the United Kingdom, 24 October 1986, § 52, Series A no. 108; Jokela v. Finland, no. 28856/95, § 57, ECHR 2002-IV; and Bulves AD, cited above, § 63).

• EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 50365/09

  BURJANADZE v. GEORGIA

  Decisions in this area commonly involve the consideration of political, economic, and social questions, which the Convention leaves within the competence of the Contracting States (see Atev v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 39689/05, § 29, 18 March 2014, with further references).