Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 20.12.2001 - 44158/98 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2001,27535) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GORZELIK AND OTHERS v. POLAND
Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 11 Abs. 2 MRK
No violation of Art. 11 (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 17.05.2001 - 44158/98
- EGMR, 20.12.2001 - 44158/98
- EGMR, 17.02.2004 - 44158/98
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72
HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2001 - 44158/98
In that sphere the Contracting States must have a broad margin of appreciation because, given their knowledge of the country, their authorities are in principle better placed than the European Court to assess whether or not there is a "pressing social need" capable of justifying interference with one of the rights guaranteed by the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, the Handyside v. the United Kingdom judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 24, p. 22, § 48). - EGMR, 13.02.2003 - 41340/98
Refah Partisi (Wohlfahrtspartei)
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2001 - 44158/98
It has, moreover, accepted that in some cases the application of radical or even drastic measures, including the immediate and permanent dissolution of an organisation and confiscation of its assets, may be justified under Article 11 (see the Socialist Party and Others v. Turkey judgment cited above, § 51; and Refah Partisi and Others v. Turkey, nos. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98, 41344/98, §§ 81 et seq., ECHR 2001-...). - EGMR, 20.09.1994 - 13470/87
OTTO-PREMINGER-INSTITUT v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2001 - 44158/98
In that connection, the Court further recalls that the freedom of association is not absolute and that in certain cases it has accepted that the need to protect Convention rights may lead States to restrict other rights or freedoms likewise set forth in the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, the Otto-Preminger-Institut v. Austria judgment of 20 September 1994, Series A no. 295-A, pp. 18 and 19, §§ 47 and 50). - EGMR, 13.08.1981 - 7601/76
YOUNG, JAMES ET WEBSTER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2001 - 44158/98
Although individual interests must on occasion be subordinated to those of a group, democracy does not simply mean that the views of a majority must always prevail: a balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position (see the Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, p. 25, § 63; and Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/95, 28331/95 and 28443/95, ECHR 1999-III, p. 65, § 112). - EKMR, 01.07.1996 - 28443/95
MONTION contre la FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2001 - 44158/98
Although individual interests must on occasion be subordinated to those of a group, democracy does not simply mean that the views of a majority must always prevail: a balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position (see the Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, p. 25, § 63; and Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/95, 28331/95 and 28443/95, ECHR 1999-III, p. 65, § 112).