Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES v. AZERBAIJAN

  Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES v. AZERBAIJAN

  Art. 9, Art. 9 Abs. 1, Art. 9 Abs. 2, Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 14 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 302/02

  JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES OF MOSCOW AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 52884/09

  It follows that there is no cause for a separate examination of the same facts from the standpoint of Article 14 of the Convention (see Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova, no. 45701/99, § 134, ECHR 2001-XII; Jehovah's Witnesses of Moscow and Others v. Russia, no. 302/02, §§ 183-188, 10 June 2010; and Association for Solidarity with Jehovah's Witnesses and Others v. Turkey, nos. 36915/10 and 8606/13, §§ 109 and 110, 24 May 2016).
• EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 44774/98

  LEYLA SAHIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 52884/09

  In this context, they referred to Leyla ??ahin v. Turkey ([GC], no. 44774/98, § 106, ECHR 2005 XI).
• EGMR, 20.09.1994 - 13470/87

  OTTO-PREMINGER-INSTITUT v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 52884/09

  It goes hand in hand with Convention supervision (see Otto-Preminger-Institut v. Austria, 20 September 1994, § 50, Series A no. 295-A).

 
• EGMR, 24.05.2016 - 36915/10

  ASSOCIATION DE SOLIDARITÉ AVEC LES TEMOINS DE JEHOVAH ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 52884/09

  It follows that there is no cause for a separate examination of the same facts from the standpoint of Article 14 of the Convention (see Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova, no. 45701/99, § 134, ECHR 2001-XII; Jehovah's Witnesses of Moscow and Others v. Russia, no. 302/02, §§ 183-188, 10 June 2010; and Association for Solidarity with Jehovah's Witnesses and Others v. Turkey, nos. 36915/10 and 8606/13, §§ 109 and 110, 24 May 2016).
• EGMR, 22.10.1981 - 7525/76

  DUDGEON c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 52884/09

  Where a substantive Article of the Convention or its Protocols has been relied on, both on its own and in conjunction with Article 14, and a separate breach has been found of the substantive Article, it is not generally necessary for the Court to consider the case under Article 14 also, though the position is otherwise if a clear inequality of treatment in the enjoyment of the right in question is a fundamental aspect of the case (see Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95, § 89, ECHR 1999-III, and Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, 22 October 1981, § 67, Series A no. 45).
• EGMR, 29.04.1999 - 25088/94

  CHASSAGNOU ET AUTRES c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 52884/09

  Where a substantive Article of the Convention or its Protocols has been relied on, both on its own and in conjunction with Article 14, and a separate breach has been found of the substantive Article, it is not generally necessary for the Court to consider the case under Article 14 also, though the position is otherwise if a clear inequality of treatment in the enjoyment of the right in question is a fundamental aspect of the case (see Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95, § 89, ECHR 1999-III, and Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, 22 October 1981, § 67, Series A no. 45).
• EGMR, 13.12.2001 - 45701/99

  METROPOLITAN CHURCH OF BESSARABIA AND OTHERS v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 52884/09

  It follows that there is no cause for a separate examination of the same facts from the standpoint of Article 14 of the Convention (see Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova, no. 45701/99, § 134, ECHR 2001-XII; Jehovah's Witnesses of Moscow and Others v. Russia, no. 302/02, §§ 183-188, 10 June 2010; and Association for Solidarity with Jehovah's Witnesses and Others v. Turkey, nos. 36915/10 and 8606/13, §§ 109 and 110, 24 May 2016).

• EGMR, 07.06.2022 - 32401/10

  TAGANROG LRO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that it was first of all for the national authorities to carry out a comprehensive assessment of the statements in the context, putting forward relevant and sufficient reasons for justifying the interference and considering the applicant community's right to freedom of expression and religion (see Religious Community of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Azerbaijan, no. 52884/09, § 36, 20 February 2020).