Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SIRC v. SLOVENIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Partly admissible Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 16.05.2002 - 44580/98
• EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98
• EGMR, 08.04.2008 - 44580/98

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 09.12.1994 - 13427/87

  RAFFINERIES GRECQUES STRAN ET STRATIS ANDREADIS c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  The applicant relied on the principles established in the Stran Greek Refineries judgment of 9 December 1994, Series A no. 301-B, the Zielinski and Pradal & Gonzalez and Others v. France judgment [GC], nos.

  It could therefore not be said that, when filing the claims, the request can be considered to be sufficiently established to qualify as an "asset" attracting the protection of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. Neither did the first judgment delivered by the Ljubljana District Court invest the applicant with an enforceable right to compensation (see, mutatis mutandis, Stran Greek Refineries and Stratis Andreadis v. Greece, judgment of 9 December 1994, Series A no. 301-B, p. 84, § 59, and Kopecky, cited above, § 59).

• EGMR, 10.07.2002 - 39794/98

  GRATZINGER ET GRATZINGEROVA c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  By way of contrast, the hope of recognition of a property right which it has been impossible to exercise effectively cannot be considered a "possession" within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, nor can a conditional claim which lapses as a result of the non-fulfilment of the condition (see Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein v. Germany [GC], no. 42527/98, §§ 82 and 83, ECHR 2001-VIII, and Gratzinger and Gratzingerova v. the Czech Republic (dec.) [GC], no. 39794/98, § 69, ECHR 2002-VII).
• EGMR, 09.10.2003 - 48321/99

  SLIVENKO v. LATVIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  (b) Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 does not guarantee the right to acquire property (see Van der Mussele v. Belgium, judgment of 23 November 1983, Series A no. 70, p. 23, § 48, and Slivenko and Others v. Latvia (dec.) [GC], no. 48321/99, § 121, ECHR 2002-II).

 
• EGMR, 02.03.2005 - 71916/01

  Entschädigungs- und Ausgleichsleistungsgesetzes über die Wiedergutmachung von …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  This does not mean that the implementation by the national authorities of the relevant legal provisions in a particular case cannot give rise to an issue under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. However, the Court must determine whether or not the applicant's claims for restitution of, or compensation for the forfeited property in the terminated part of the contentious proceedings amounted to a "possession" within the meaning of that provision (see, mutatis mutandis, Kopecky, cited above, §§ 35-40, and von Maltzan and others v. Germany [GC], nos. 71916/01, 71917/01 and 10260/02, §§ 75-78, ECHR 2005-...).
• EGMR, 23.11.1983 - 8919/80

  VAN DER MUSSELE c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  (b) Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 does not guarantee the right to acquire property (see Van der Mussele v. Belgium, judgment of 23 November 1983, Series A no. 70, p. 23, § 48, and Slivenko and Others v. Latvia (dec.) [GC], no. 48321/99, § 121, ECHR 2002-II).
• EGMR, 28.10.1999 - 24846/94

  ZIELINSKI ET PRADAL & GONZALEZ ET AUTRES c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  24846/94 and 34165/96 to 34173/96, ECHR 1999-VII, and the National & Provincial Building Society and others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 23 October 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VII.
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  The Court reiterates that in the Kudla v. Poland judgment it decided that Article 13 of the Convention "guarantees an effective remedy before a national authority for an alleged breach of the requirement under Article 6 § 1 to hear a case within a reasonable time" (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 156, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 22.03.2001 - 34044/96

  Schießbefehl

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  Moreover, it is primarily for the national administrative and judicial authorities, notably the courts, to interpret and apply domestic law (see, inter alia, Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany [GC], nos. 34044/96, 35532/97, 44801/98, § 49, ECHR 2001-II, and Nadbiskupija Zagrebacka v. Slovenia (dec.), no. 60376/00, 27 May 2004).
• EGMR, 27.05.2004 - 60376/00

  NADBISKUPIJA ZAGREBACKA v. SLOVENIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.06.2006 - 44580/98

  Moreover, it is primarily for the national administrative and judicial authorities, notably the courts, to interpret and apply domestic law (see, inter alia, Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany [GC], nos. 34044/96, 35532/97, 44801/98, § 49, ECHR 2001-II, and Nadbiskupija Zagrebacka v. Slovenia (dec.), no. 60376/00, 27 May 2004).