Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TORRI AND OTHERS v. ITALY

  Art. 14, Art. 14+P1 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (15)

• EGMR, 15.06.1999 - 34610/97

  DOMALEWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, for example, Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Domalewski v. Poland (dec.), no. 34610/97, ECHR 1999-V; and Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X).

  One of the considerations in the assessment under this provision is whether the applicant's right to derive benefits from the social insurance scheme in question has been infringed in a manner resulting in the impairment of the essence of that pension right (see Domalewski v. Poland (dec.), no. 34610/97, ECHR 1999-V and Kjartan Ásmundsson, cited above, § 39).

• EGMR, 01.06.1999 - 39860/98

  SKORKIEWICZ v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  Nevertheless, it has been recognised that the making of contributions to a pension fund may, in certain circumstances, create a property right and such a right may be affected by the manner in which the fund is distributed (see Skorkiewicz v. Poland (dec.), no. 39860/98, 1 June 1999).

  Indeed, as mentioned above, it has been recognised that the making of contributions to a pension fund may, in certain circumstances, create a property right and such a right may be affected by the manner in which the fund is distributed (see Skorkiewicz v. Poland (dec.), no. 39860/98, 1 June 1999).

• EGMR, 28.04.2009 - 38886/05

  RASMUSSEN v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  Where the amount of a benefit is reduced or discontinued, this may constitute interference with possessions which requires to be justified (see Kjartan Ásmundsson, cited above, § 40, and Rasmussen v. Poland, no. 38886/05, § 71, 28 April 2009).

 
• EGMR, 18.02.1991 - 12033/86

  FREDIN c. SUÈDE (N° 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  In that light the applicants cannot hold that circumstance against the authorities (see, mutatis mutandis, Allan Jacobsson v. Sweden (no. 1), 25 October 1989, § 60-62, Series A no. 163; Fredin v. Sweden (no. 1), 18 February 1991, § 54, Series A no. 192, and Lacz v Poland, (dec.), no. 22665/02, 23 June 2009).
• EGMR, 23.11.1983 - 8919/80

  VAN DER MUSSELE c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  However, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 does not guarantee as such any right to become the owner of property (see Van der Mussele v. Belgium, 23 November 1983, § 48, Series A no. 70; Slivenko v. Latvia (dec.) [GC], no. 48321/99, § 121, ECHR 2002-II; and Kopecký v. Slovakia [GC], no. 44912/98, § 35 (b), ECHR 2004-IX).
• EGMR, 11.06.2002 - 36042/97

  WILLIS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  The Court reiterates that discrimination means treating differently, without an objective and reasonable justification, persons in relevantly similar situations (see Willis v. the United Kingdom, no. 36042/97, § 48, ECHR 2002-IV).
• EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75

  SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  The requisite fair balance will not be struck where the person concerned bears an individual and excessive burden (see Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, §§ 69-74, Series A no. 52).
• EGMR, 09.10.2003 - 48321/99

  SLIVENKO v. LATVIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  However, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 does not guarantee as such any right to become the owner of property (see Van der Mussele v. Belgium, 23 November 1983, § 48, Series A no. 70; Slivenko v. Latvia (dec.) [GC], no. 48321/99, § 121, ECHR 2002-II; and Kopecký v. Slovakia [GC], no. 44912/98, § 35 (b), ECHR 2004-IX).
• EGMR, 25.10.1989 - 10842/84

  ALLAN JACOBSSON v. SWEDEN (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  In that light the applicants cannot hold that circumstance against the authorities (see, mutatis mutandis, Allan Jacobsson v. Sweden (no. 1), 25 October 1989, § 60-62, Series A no. 163; Fredin v. Sweden (no. 1), 18 February 1991, § 54, Series A no. 192, and Lacz v Poland, (dec.), no. 22665/02, 23 June 2009).
• EGMR, 12.10.2000 - 43440/98

  JANKOVIC c. CROATIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 11838/07

  Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, for example, Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Domalewski v. Poland (dec.), no. 34610/97, ECHR 1999-V; and Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X).
• EGMR, 12.04.2006 - 65731/01

  STEC ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 12.10.2004 - 60669/00

  KJARTAN ÁSMUNDSSON c. ISLANDE
• EGMR, 16.11.2004 - 29865/96

  Diskriminierung türkischer Ehefrauen durch Verpflichtung zur Tragung des Namens …
• EGMR, 26.10.2004 - 27265/95

  TERAZZI S.R.L. c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 31.01.1986 - 8734/79

  BARTHOLD v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50)

• EGMR, 11.02.2021 - 4893/13

  CASARIN c. ITALIE

  Le Gouvernement indique encore que la situation de la requérante et des autres enseignants en surnombre, auxquels avait été offerte la possibilité d'un transfert à l'INPS, est semblable à celle des requérants de l'affaire Torri et autres c. Italie ((déc.), nos 11838/07 et 12302/07, 24 janvier 2012), déclarée irrecevable par la Cour.
• EGMR, 28.02.2017 - 44787/05

  PETRO-M SRL ET RINAX-TVR SRL c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA

  Dans ces conditions, elle juge que la différence de traitement subséquente au revirement de jurisprudence de la Cour suprême de justice peut être considérée comme objectivement et raisonnablement justifiée (Torri et autres c. Italie (déc.), nos 11838/07 et 12302/07, § 53, 24 janvier 2012, et comparer avec Beian c. Roumanie (no 1), no 30658/05, § 63, CEDH 2007-V (extraits)).