Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  Z c. FINLANDE

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation de l'art. 8 Non-lieu à examiner l'art. 13 Préjudice moral - réparation pécuniaire Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure nationale Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure de la Convention (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  Z v. FINLAND

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 8 Not necessary to examine Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

• Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte

  (englisch)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Verfahrensgang

• EKMR, 28.02.1995 - 22009/93
• EGMR, 25.02.1997 - 22009/93, 9/1996/627/811

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 18139/91

  TOLSTOY MILOSLAVSKY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.02.1997 - 22009/93

  The Court will consider the above claims in the light of the criteria laid down in its case-law, namely whether the costs and expenses were actually and necessarily incurred in order to prevent or obtain redress for the matter found to constitute a violation of the Convention and were reasonable as to quantum (see, for instance, the Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 316-B, p. 83, para. 77).
• EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89

  SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.02.1997 - 22009/93

  75; and the Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland judgment of 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263, p. 20, para.
• EGMR, 27.11.1992 - 13441/87

  OLSSON c. SUÈDE (N° 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.02.1997 - 22009/93

  The Court has therefore no jurisdiction to entertain it (see, for instance, the Olsson v. Sweden (no. 2) judgment of 27 November 1992, Series A no. 250, pp.

 
• EGMR, 22.10.1981 - 7525/76

  DUDGEON c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.02.1997 - 22009/93

  In view of the highly intimate and sensitive nature of information concerning a person's HIV status, any State measures compelling communication or disclosure of such information without the consent of the patient call for the most careful scrutiny on the part of the Court, as do the safeguards designed to secure an effective protection (see, mutatis mutandis, the Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom judgment of 22 October 1981, Series A no. 45, p. 21, para. 52; and the Johansen v. Norway judgment of 7 August 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-III, pp. 1003-04, para. 64).
• EGMR, 26.03.1987 - 9248/81

  LEANDER c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.02.1997 - 22009/93

  The scope of this margin will depend on such factors as the nature and seriousness of the interests at stake and the gravity of the interference (see, for instance, the Leander v. Sweden judgment of 26 March 1987, Series A no. 116, p. 25, para. 58; and, mutatis mutandis, the Manoussakis and Others v. Greece judgment of 26 September 1996, Reports 1996-IV, p. 1364, para. 44).
• EGMR, 13.06.1979 - 6833/74

  MARCKX v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.02.1997 - 22009/93

  However, the Court will confine itself to the above conclusion, as it is for the State to choose the means to be used in its domestic legal system for discharging its obligations under Article 53 of the Convention (art. 53) (see the Marckx v. Belgium judgment of 13 June 1979, Series A no. 31, pp. 25-26, para. 58).
• EGMR, 06.09.1978 - 5029/71

  Klass u.a. ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.02.1997 - 22009/93

  The interference with the applicant's private and family life which the contested orders entailed was thus subjected to important limitations and was accompanied by effective and adequate safeguards against abuse (see, for instance, the Klass and Others v. Germany judgment of 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28, pp. 23-24, paras. 49-50; and the Leander judgment cited above, p. 25, para. 60).

• EGMR, 06.11.2018 - 25527/13

  VICENT DEL CAMPO v. SPAIN

  42. Accordingly, the Court finds that the inclusion by the High Court of Justice of the applicant's identity, coupled with the statement on his acts as part of its own reasoning in the judgment constituted an "interference" with the applicant's right to respect for his private life as guaranteed by Article 8 § 1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, C.C. v. Spain, no. 1425/06, § 26, 6 October 2009; Sanchez Cardenas v. Norway, no. 12148/03, § 34, 4 October 2007; and Z v. Finland, no. 22009/93, § 71, 25 February 1997).