Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 21.05.2002 - 61558/00 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2002,39117) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 25735/94
Fall E. gegen DEUTSCHLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 21.05.2002 - 61558/00
The Court recalls that the mutual enjoyment by parent and child of each other's company constitutes a fundamental element of family life, even if the relationship between the parents has broken down, and domestic measures hindering such enjoyment amount to an interference with the right protected by Article 8 of the Convention (see, amongst others, Elsholz v. Germany [GC], no. 25735/94, § 43, ECHR 2000-VIII).The Contracting States enjoy a margin of appreciation in assessing whether and to what extent differences in otherwise similar situations justify a different treatment (see Thlimennos v. Greece [GC], no. 25735/94, § 44, ECHR 2000-IV, and, for example, Camp and Bourimi v. the Netherlands, no. 28369/95, § 37, ECHR 2000-X).
- EGMR, 03.10.2000 - 28369/95
CAMP ET BOURIMI c. PAYS-BAS
Auszug aus EGMR, 21.05.2002 - 61558/00
The Contracting States enjoy a margin of appreciation in assessing whether and to what extent differences in otherwise similar situations justify a different treatment (see Thlimennos v. Greece [GC], no. 25735/94, § 44, ECHR 2000-IV, and, for example, Camp and Bourimi v. the Netherlands, no. 28369/95, § 37, ECHR 2000-X). - EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92
HOKKANEN v. FINLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 21.05.2002 - 61558/00
The Court's task is not to substitute itself for the domestic authorities in the exercise of their responsibilities regarding custody and access issues, but rather to review, in the light of the Convention, the decisions taken by those authorities in the exercise of their power of appreciation (see, for example, the Hokkanen v. Finland judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299-A, p. 20, § 55). - EGMR, 24.02.1995 - 16424/90
McMICHAEL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 21.05.2002 - 61558/00
The Court must also determine whether, having regard to the particular circumstances of the case and notably the importance of the decisions to be taken, the applicant was involved in the decision-making process, seen as a whole, to a degree sufficient to provide them with the requisite protection of their interests (see, for example, the McMichael v. the United Kingdom judgment of 24 February 1995, Series A no. 307-B, p. 55, § 87).