Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/1996,15871
EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94 (https://dejure.org/1996,15871)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 19.02.1996 - 23218/94 (https://dejure.org/1996,15871)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 19. Februar 1996 - 23218/94 (https://dejure.org/1996,15871)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1996,15871) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

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 ... (32)Neu Zitiert selbst (11)

  • EGMR, 26.05.1994 - 16969/90

    KEEGAN v. IRELAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    In both contexts regard must be had to the fair balance that has to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and of the community as a whole; and in both contexts the State enjoys a certain margin of appreciation (see, most recently, the Keegan v. Ireland judgment of 26 May 1994, Series A no. 290, p. 19, para. 49, and the Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands judgment of 27 October 1994, Series A no. 297-C, p. 56, para. 31).

    The Court has repeatedly stressed that the boundaries between the two types "do not lend themselves to precise definition" (see, for instance, the Keegan v. Ireland judgment of 26 May 1994, Series A no. 290, p. 19, para. 49).

  • EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92

    HOKKANEN v. FINLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    The Court reiterates that it follows from the concept of family on which Article 8 (art. 8) is based that a child born of a marital union is ipso jure part of that relationship; hence, from the moment of the child's birth and by the very fact of it, there exists between him and his parents a bond amounting to "family life" (see the Berrehab v. the Netherlands judgment of 21 June 1988, series A no. 138, p. 14, para. 21, and the Hokkanen v. Finland judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299-A, p. 19, para. 54) which subsequent events cannot break save in exceptional circumstances.

    Since Ersin was born from the legitimate marriage between the applicant and his wife, it follows from the aforementioned Berrehab judgment (p. 14, para. 21) that there is ipso facto such a relationship (see also the Hokkanen v. Finland judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299-A, p. 19, para. 54).

  • EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 9214/80

    ABDULAZIZ, CABALES AND BALKANDALI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    As a matter of well-established international law and subject to its treaty obligations, a State has the right to control the entry of non-nationals into its territory (see, among other authorities, the Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 94, pp. 33-34, para. 67).

    In its Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 94, the Court adopted the established doctrine of the Commission that although, certainly, the right of aliens to enter or to remain in a country is not as such guaranteed by the Convention, immigration controls have to be exercised consistently with Convention obligations and that, accordingly, the exclusion of a person from a State where members of his family are living may raise an issue under Article 8 (art. 8) (see paragraphs 59 and 60 of the judgment).

  • EGMR, 20.03.1991 - 15576/89

    CRUZ VARAS ET AUTRES c. SUÈDE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    In order to establish the scope of the State's obligations, the facts of the case must be considered (see, mutatis mutandis, the Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali judgment previously cited, p. 34, para. 68, and the Cruz Varas and Others v. Sweden judgment of 20 March 1991, Series A no. 201, p. 32, para. 88).

    The Court has repeatedly stressed that it is not bound by the Commission's findings of fact and remains free to make its own appreciation in the light of all the material before it (see, inter alia, the Cruz Varas and Others v. Sweden judgment of 20 March 1991, Series A no. 201, p. 29, para. 74).

  • EGMR, 24.02.1995 - 16424/90

    McMICHAEL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    "According to the Court's well established case-law, "the mutual enjoyment by parent and child of each other's company constitutes a fundamental element of family life"", as the Court pointed out in paragraph 86 of the McMichael v. the United Kingdom judgment of 24 February 1995, Series A no. 307-B, p. 55. Consequently, decisions of State authorities hindering such enjoyment in principle amount to an infringement of the State's obligation to respect the family life of those concerned.
  • EGMR, 21.06.1988 - 10730/84

    BERREHAB v. THE NETHERLANDS

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    On the contrary, its subsequent case-law has solidly confirmed the principle that, although Contracting States have, as a matter of well-established international law, the right to control the entry, residence and expulsion of aliens, that right is subject to their obligations under the Convention, notably those under Article 8 (art. 8) (see the Berrehab v. the Netherlands judgment of 21 June 1988, Series A no. 138, pp. 15-16, paras. 28-29; the Moustaquim v. Belgium judgment of 18 February 1991, Series A no. 193, p. 19, para. 43; the Cruz Varas and Others judgment cited above, p. 28, para. 70; the Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, p. 34, para. 102; the Beldjoudi v. France judgment of 26 March 1992, Series A no. 234-A, p. 27, para. 74; and the Nasri v. France judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 320-B, p. 25, para. 41).
  • EGMR, 18.02.1991 - 12313/86

    MOUSTAQUIM c. BELGIQUE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    On the contrary, its subsequent case-law has solidly confirmed the principle that, although Contracting States have, as a matter of well-established international law, the right to control the entry, residence and expulsion of aliens, that right is subject to their obligations under the Convention, notably those under Article 8 (art. 8) (see the Berrehab v. the Netherlands judgment of 21 June 1988, Series A no. 138, pp. 15-16, paras. 28-29; the Moustaquim v. Belgium judgment of 18 February 1991, Series A no. 193, p. 19, para. 43; the Cruz Varas and Others judgment cited above, p. 28, para. 70; the Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, p. 34, para. 102; the Beldjoudi v. France judgment of 26 March 1992, Series A no. 234-A, p. 27, para. 74; and the Nasri v. France judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 320-B, p. 25, para. 41).
  • EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87

    VILVARAJAH ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    On the contrary, its subsequent case-law has solidly confirmed the principle that, although Contracting States have, as a matter of well-established international law, the right to control the entry, residence and expulsion of aliens, that right is subject to their obligations under the Convention, notably those under Article 8 (art. 8) (see the Berrehab v. the Netherlands judgment of 21 June 1988, Series A no. 138, pp. 15-16, paras. 28-29; the Moustaquim v. Belgium judgment of 18 February 1991, Series A no. 193, p. 19, para. 43; the Cruz Varas and Others judgment cited above, p. 28, para. 70; the Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, p. 34, para. 102; the Beldjoudi v. France judgment of 26 March 1992, Series A no. 234-A, p. 27, para. 74; and the Nasri v. France judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 320-B, p. 25, para. 41).
  • EGMR, 26.03.1992 - 12083/86

    BELDJOUDI v. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    On the contrary, its subsequent case-law has solidly confirmed the principle that, although Contracting States have, as a matter of well-established international law, the right to control the entry, residence and expulsion of aliens, that right is subject to their obligations under the Convention, notably those under Article 8 (art. 8) (see the Berrehab v. the Netherlands judgment of 21 June 1988, Series A no. 138, pp. 15-16, paras. 28-29; the Moustaquim v. Belgium judgment of 18 February 1991, Series A no. 193, p. 19, para. 43; the Cruz Varas and Others judgment cited above, p. 28, para. 70; the Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, p. 34, para. 102; the Beldjoudi v. France judgment of 26 March 1992, Series A no. 234-A, p. 27, para. 74; and the Nasri v. France judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 320-B, p. 25, para. 41).
  • EGMR, 27.10.1994 - 18535/91

    KROON AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.02.1996 - 23218/94
    In both contexts regard must be had to the fair balance that has to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and of the community as a whole; and in both contexts the State enjoys a certain margin of appreciation (see, most recently, the Keegan v. Ireland judgment of 26 May 1994, Series A no. 290, p. 19, para. 49, and the Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands judgment of 27 October 1994, Series A no. 297-C, p. 56, para. 31).
  • EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 19465/92

    NASRI v. FRANCE

  • BVerwG, 30.03.2010 - 1 C 8.09

    Visum; Drittstaatsangehörige; Familienzusammenführung; Ehegattennachzug;

    Auch sichert er nicht das Recht zu, den Ort zu wählen, der am besten geeignet ist, um ein Familienleben aufzubauen (vgl. EGMR, Entscheidung vom 7. Oktober 2004 - Nr. 33743/03, Dragan u.a. - NVwZ 2005, 1043 und Urteile vom 21. Dezember 2001 - Nr. 31465/96, Sen - InfAuslR 2002, 334, vom 28. November 1996 - Nr. 73/1995/579/665, Ahmut - InfAuslR 1997, 141, vom 19. Februar 1996 - Nr. 53/1995/559/645, Gül - InfAuslR 1996, 245 und vom 28. Mai 1985 - Nr. 15/1983/71/107-109, Abdulaziz u.a. - InfAuslR 1985, 298).

    In diesem Zusammenhang misst der Gerichtshof allerdings bei der Frage, ob der Nachzug des Familienangehörigen das adäquate Mittel zur Etablierung eines gemeinsamen Familienlebens wäre, regelmäßig dem Umstand Bedeutung bei, ob er die einzige Möglichkeit darstellt, ein Familienleben zu entwickeln, etwa weil Hindernisse für eine Wohnsitzbegründung im Ausland bestehen oder besondere Umstände vorliegen, aufgrund derer eine solche Wohnsitzbegründung nicht erwartet werden kann (vgl. EGMR, Urteile vom 1. Dezember 2005 - Nr. 60665/00, Tuquabo-Tekle - InfAuslR 2006, 105, vom 21. Dezember 2001 a.a.O. Rn. 40, vom 28. November 1996 a.a.O. Rn. 70, vom 19. Februar 1996 a.a.O. Rn. 39 und vom 28. Mai 1985 a.a.O. Rn. 60).

  • BVerwG, 30.04.2009 - 1 C 3.08

    Ehegattennachzug; Familienzusammenführung; Sicherung des Lebensunterhalts;

    Auch für die Verhältnismäßigkeit eines Eingriffs in den Schutzbereich des Art. 8 EMRK kommt nach der Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte der Frage erhebliche Bedeutung zu, ob das Familienleben ohne Hindernisse auch im Herkunftsland möglich ist (vgl. EGMR, Urteil vom 19. Februar 1996 - 53/1995/559/645 - InfAuslR 1996, 245, Gül; Urteil vom 28. November 1996 - 73/1995/579/665 - InfAuslR 1997, 141, Ahmut) oder ob der Nachzug das einzige adäquate Mittel darstellt, in familiärer Gemeinschaft zu leben (vgl. EGMR, Urteil vom 21. Dezember 2001 - 31465/96 - InfAuslR 2002, 334, Sen).
  • EGMR, 09.07.2021 - 6697/18

    Familiennachzug bei subsidiärem Schutz: Kompromiss zwischen Menschenrechten und

    Il n'existe pas d'obstacles insurmontables à ce que la famille vive dans le pays d'origine de la personne qui demande à être rejointe (voir, par exemple, Gül c. Suisse, no 23218/94, 19 février 1996, Ahmut c. Pays-Bas, no 21702/93, 28 novembre 1996, Chandra et autres c. Pays-Bas no 53102/99, 13 mai 2003, Berisha c. Suisse, no 948/12, 30 juillet 2013, Nacic et autres, précité, et I.A.A. c. Royaume-Uni (déc.), no 25960/13, 8 mars 2016).
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