Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ROCK RUBY HOTELS LTD v. TURKEY

  (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 28.05.2002 - 46159/99
• EGMR, 22.09.2009 - 46159/99
• EGMR, 26.10.2010 - 46159/99

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

• EGMR, 23.03.1995 - 15318/89

  LOIZIDOU c. TURQUIE (EXCEPTIONS PRÉLIMINAIRES)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.10.2010 - 46159/99

  Furthermore, the Court has taken into account the uncertainties, inherent in any attempt to quantify the real losses incurred by the applicant company (see Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary objections), 23 March 1995, § 102, Series A no. 310, and (merits) 18 December 1996, § 32, Reports 1996-VI).

• EGMR, 07.06.2012 - 38433/09

  CENTRO EUROPA 7 S.R.L. AND DI STEFANO v. ITALY

  In addition, the Court considers that the violations it has found of Article 10 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the instant case must have caused the applicant company prolonged uncertainty in the conduct of its business and feelings of helplessness and frustration (see, mutatis mutandis, Rock Ruby Hotels Ltd v. Turkey (just satisfaction), no. 46159/99, § 36, 26 October 2010).
• EGMR, 25.07.2013 - 23465/03

  AGROKOMPLEKS v. UKRAINE

  The Court also considers that the violations it has found of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the instant case must have caused the applicant company prolonged uncertainty in the conduct of its business (see Rock Ruby Hotels Ltd v. Turkey (just satisfaction), no. 46159/99, § 36, 26 October 2010, and Centro Europa 7 S.R.L. and di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 221, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 14.06.2018 - 68039/14

  EUROMAK METAL DOO v.

  In respect of the amount sought under the head of non-pecuniary damage, and having regard to its case-law (see Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 221, ECHR 2012, and Rock Ruby Hotels Ltd v. Turkey (just satisfaction), no. 46159/99, § 36, 26 October 2010), the Court considers, ruling on an equitable basis, that an award of EUR 4, 000 should be made.
• EGMR, 16.01.2018 - 66209/10

  HUNGUEST ZRT v. HUNGARY

  In respect of non-pecuniary damage, the Court reiterates that the possibility that a commercial company may be awarded pecuniary compensation for non-pecuniary damage cannot be excluded, considering that the situation in issue must have caused the applicant company prolonged uncertainty in the conduct of its business (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC] no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV; Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 221, ECHR 2012; and Rock Ruby Hotels Ltd v. Turkey (just satisfaction), no. 46159/99, § 36, 26 October 2010).