Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VALANCIENE v. LITHUANIA

  No violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  VALANCIENÄ- v. LITHUANIA

  Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

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

• EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75

  SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2017 - 2657/10

  Even assuming that that situation amounted to an interference with the applicant's property rights, the Court notes that such an interference struck a "fair balance" between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual's fundamental rights (see Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, § 69, Series A no. 52), for the reasons set out below.
• EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 17120/04

  BERGAUER AND OTHERS v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2017 - 2657/10

  The Court has also held that in regulating the restitution process the Contracting States have a wide discretion, including over the rules of how the compensation for long-extinguished property rights should be assessed (see Jantner v. Slovakia, no. 39050/97, § 34, 4 March 2003, Bergauer and Others v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 17120/04, 13 December 2005, and Paukstis, cited above, § 74).

• EGMR, 18.12.2018 - 37723/11

  CERNIAK v. LITHUANIA

  In this connection, the Court takes note of the Government's position that the cooperation of applicants with the public authorities in the restitution process is of key importance when determining the proportionality of the interference with their property rights (see paragraph 29 above; see also Paukstis v. Lithuania, no. 17467/07, §§ 85-86, 24 November 2015, and Valanciene v. Lithuania, no. 2657/10, §§ 71-72, 18 April 2017).