Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PETROV AND X v. RUSSIA

  Preliminary objection dismissed (Art. 34) Individual applications;(Art. 34) Hinder the exercise of the right of application;Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 34) Individual applications;(Art. 34) Victim;Violation of Article 8 - Right to ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  PETROVY v. RUSSIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 14 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (26)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89

  SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2018 - 23608/16

  Very weighty reasons need to be put forward before a difference in treatment on the grounds of sex can be regarded as compatible with the Convention (see Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, § 67, Series A no. 263; Zaunegger v. Germany, no. 22028/04, § 51, 3 December 2009; and Buchs v. Switzerland, no. 9929/12, § 67, 27 May 2014).
• EGMR, 22.04.1992 - 12351/86

  VIDAL c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2018 - 23608/16

  The Court's task is to ascertain whether the proceedings in their entirety, including the way in which evidence was taken, were fair (see, among many other authorities, Vidal v. Belgium, 22 April 1992, § 33, Series A no. 235-B; G.B. v. France, cited above, § 59, and, more recently, Gregacevic v. Croatia, no. 58331/09, § 63, 10 July 2012).
• EGMR, 05.04.2007 - 74237/01

  BAYSAYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2018 - 23608/16

  The alleged failure to submit relevant information and documents does not raise an issue under Article 34 (see Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, § 201, ECHR 2005-IV, and Baysayeva v. Russia, no. 74237/01, § 168, 5 April 2007).
• EGMR, 29.04.2014 - 60092/12

  Z.J. v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2018 - 23608/16

  It follows from these considerations that the Court's task is not to substitute itself for the domestic authorities in the exercise of their responsibilities regarding child 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 (see Sahin v. Germany [GC], no. 30943/96, § 64, ECHR 2003-VIII; Sommerfeld v. Germany [GC], no. 31871/96, § 62, ECHR 2003-VIII (extracts); C. v. Finland, no. 18249/02, § 52, 9 May 2006; and Z.J. v. Lithuania, no. 60092/12, § 96, 29 April 2014).

• EGMR, 10.11.2022 - 25426/20

  I.M. ET AUTRES c. ITALIE

  La marge d'appréciation laissée aux autorités nationales compétentes variera selon la nature des questions en litige et l'importance des intérêts en jeu (Petrov et X c. Russie, no 23608/16, §§ 98-102, 23 octobre 2018).
• EGMR, 20.04.2021 - 58718/15

  STÜKER v. GERMANY

  Russland, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 23608/16, Rdnr. 101, 23.
• EGMR, 16.04.2024 - 1240/21

  NITA v. ROMANIA

  The relevant principles concerning interference with the right to respect for family life are summarised in Strand Lobben and Others v. Norway ([GC], no. 37283/13, §§ 202-04, 10 September 2019) and Petrov and X v. Russia (no. 23608/16, §§ 98-102, 23 October 2018).

 
• EGMR, 02.03.2023 - 42590/21

  M.P.A. v. SPAIN

  The domestic courts must conduct an in-depth examination of the family situation and of a series of factors before making a balanced and reasonable assessment, with a constant concern for determining what would be the best solution for the child (see Petrov and X v. Russia, no. 23608/16, § 98, 23 October 2018, and the case-law cited therein).

  The margin of appreciation to be accorded to them will vary in accordance with the nature of the issues and the importance of the interests at stake (see Petrov and X v. Russia, no. 23608/16, §§ 98-102, 23 October 2018).

• EGMR, 24.06.2021 - 40910/19

  A.T. c. ITALIE

  À cet égard, elle rappelle que si l'article 8 ne renferme aucune condition explicite de procédure, le processus décisionnel lié aux mesures d'ingérence doit être équitable et propre à respecter les intérêts protégés par cette disposition (Petrov et X c. Russie, no 23608/16, § 101, 23 octobre 2018).
• EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 41382/19

  R.B. ET M. c. ITALIE

  À cet égard, elle rappelle que si l'article 8 ne renferme aucune condition explicite de procédure, le processus décisionnel lié aux mesures d'ingérence doit être équitable et propre à respecter les intérêts protégés par cette disposition (Petrov et X c. Russie, no 23608/16, § 101, 23 octobre 2018).
• EGMR, 08.02.2022 - 19938/20

  Q AND R v. SLOVENIA

  Mentioned incidentally in their observations, they are not of such a nature as to qualify as a "complaint" within the meaning of the Court's case-law (see Petrov and X v. Russia, no. 23608/16, §§ 63 and 64, 23 October 2018, and Chizhov v. Russia, no. 11536/19, §§ 47-48, 6 July 2021).
• EGMR, 20.05.2021 - 13527/18

  LAPSHIN v. AZERBAIJAN

  An application may be rejected as an abuse of the right of individual application in case of use of particularly vexatious, insulting, threatening or provocative language by the applicant directed, inter alia, against the respondent government or its Agent (see, for instance, Petrov and X v. Russia, no. 23608/16, § 74, 23 October 2018).
• EGMR, 14.02.2023 - 10477/21

  BYCENKO v. LITHUANIA

  While reiterating that Article 8 of the Convention contains no explicit procedural requirements (see the references in paragraph 113 above), the Court observes that in several cases concerning children it found that the decision-making process had not been fair in view of the failure of the domestic authorities to obtain an expert opinion, where such an opinion had been necessary in order to assess a child's relationship with his or her parents or to evaluate whether the statements given by the child corresponded to his or her true wishes (see Elsholz v. Germany [GC], no. 25735/94, § 52, ECHR 2000-VIII, and Petrov and X v. Russia, no. 23608/16, § 108, 23 October 2018).
• EGMR, 27.05.2021 - 54978/17

  JESSICA MARCHI c. ITALIE

  À cet égard, elle rappelle que si l'article 8 ne renferme aucune condition explicite de procédure, il faut que le processus décisionnel débouchant sur des mesures d'ingérence soit équitable et respecte comme il se doit les intérêts protégés par cet article (Petrov et X c. Russie, no 23608/16, § 101, 23 octobre 2018,), particulièrement lorsqu'il s'agit de la prise en charge d'enfants (W. c. Royaume-Uni, 8 juillet 1987 §§ 62 et 64, série A no 121, T.P. et K.M. c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 28945/95, §§ 72-73, CEDH 2001-V (extraits)) ou du retrait de l'autorité parentale avec autorisation d'adopter l'enfant (Strand Lobben et autres c. Norvège [GC], no 37283/13, §§ 212-213, 220, 10 septembre 2019).
• EGMR, 21.04.2020 - 35215/06

  SEVCENCO ET TIMOSIN c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 17.10.2023 - 15646/18

  BÎZDÎGA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 05.09.2023 - 37024/20

  CZAJKOWSKI v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 19.05.2022 - 58282/19

  H.P. AND OTHERS v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 01.02.2022 - 34694/19

  A.U. AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA
• EGMR, 29.09.2020 - 36335/18

  FATKHUTDINOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 24.10.2023 - 13218/21

  PACHECO CASTELO v. PORTUGAL
• EGMR, 13.09.2022 - 33647/18

  AKSOY c. TÜRKIYE
• EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 3018/20

  B.G. v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 19.10.2021 - 24002/20

  GUARDIANI c. ITALIE
• EGMR - 30206/23 (anhängig)

  M.L. v. NORTH MACEDONIA
• EGMR - 41866/23 (anhängig)

  FRANCESCHETTI c. ITALIE
• EGMR - 37870/21 (anhängig)

  R.G. c. SUISSE
• EGMR - 35790/23 (anhängig)

  LONCAR v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 03.10.2023 - 63543/19

  YAZDI v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 33654/18

  KOTEVA v. BULGARIA