Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KUDREVICIUS AND OTHERS v. LITHUANIA

  Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 11 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly) Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Kudrevicius and Others v. Lithuania

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05
• EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 37553/05

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (16)

• EGMR, 05.03.2009 - 31684/05

  BARRACO c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  As a general principle, the Court nevertheless reiterates that any demonstration in a public place inevitably causes a certain level of disruption to ordinary life, including disruption of traffic, and that it is important for the public authorities to show a certain degree of tolerance towards peaceful gatherings if the freedom of assembly guaranteed by Article 11 of the Convention is not to be deprived of all substance (see Galstyan, cited above, §§ 116-117; Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 37, ECHR 2007-III; Oya Ataman, cited above, §§ 38-42; and Barraco v. France, no. 31684/05, § 43, 5 March 2009).

  [16] Barraco v. France, no. 31684/05, 5 March 2009.

  [20] Barraco v. France, no. 31684/05, 5 March 2009.

• EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 10346/05

  EVA MOLNÁR c. HONGRIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  It notes that restrictions on freedom of peaceful assembly in public places may serve the protection of the rights of others with a view to preventing disorder and maintaining the orderly circulation of traffic (see Éva Molnár v. Hungary, no. 10346/05, § 34, 7 October 2008).

  [15] Éva Molnár v. Hungary, no. 10346/05, § 34, 7 October 2008.

• EuGH, 12.06.2003 - C-112/00

  Sperrung der Brennerautobahn durch Demonstranten führt nicht zur Staatshaftung …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  In Eugen Schmidberger, Internationale Transporte und Planzüge v. Republik Österreich, Case C-112/00 [2003], ECR I-05659 the European Court of Justice found that the fact that the Austrian authorities did not ban a demonstration by protesters which resulted in the complete closure of a single major transit route between Austria and Germany for almost thirty hours was not incompatible with Articles 28 and 29 of the Treaty Establishing the European Community, read together with Article 10 of that Treaty, provided that that restriction of trade in goods between Member States was justified by the legitimate interest in the protection of fundamental rights, in that case the protesters" freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, which applied both to the Community and the Member States.

  [21] C-112/00, judgment of 12 June 2003.

 
• EGMR, 05.12.2006 - 74552/01

  OYA ATAMAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  Turning to the question of whether the interference was "necessary in a democratic society", the Court refers to its case-law to the effect that the authorities have a duty to take appropriate measures with regard to lawful demonstrations in order to ensure their peaceful conduct (see Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, § 35, ECHR 2006-XIII).

  [13] Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, § 35, ECHR 2006-XIV.

• EGMR, 02.10.2001 - 29221/95

  STANKOV AND THE UNITED MACEDONIAN ORGANISATION ILINDEN v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  29221/95 and 29225/95, §§ 85-86, ECHR 2001-IX.
• EGMR, 25.04.1978 - 5856/72

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  [18] Tyrer v. the United Kingdom judgment of 25 April 1978, Series A no. 26, § 31.
• EGMR, 26.09.2000 - 38881/97

  FINDLATER v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  Accordingly, the Court finds that the complaint thus falls outside the scope of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, mutatis mutandis, Findlater v. United Kingdom (dec.), no. 38881/97, 26 September 2000).
• EGMR, 25.01.2000 - 37683/97

  IAN EDGAR (LIVERPOOL) LIMITED contre le ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  The Court has consistently held that future income is only itself a "possession" once it has been earned, or an enforceable claim to it exists (see Ian Edgar (Liverpool) Ltd v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 37683/97, ECHR 2000-I; and Van Marle and Others v. the Netherlands, 26 June 1986, §§ 39-41, Series A no. 101).
• EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 40721/08

  FÁBER v. HUNGARY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  In this context it recalls that any measures interfering with freedom of assembly and expression other than in cases of incitement to violence or rejection of democratic principles do a disservice to democracy and often even endanger it (see Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 37, 24 July 2012).
• EGMR, 20.02.2003 - 20652/92

  DJAVIT AN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 37553/05

  As such this right covers both private meetings and meetings in public thoroughfares as well as static meetings and public processions; in addition, it can be exercised by individuals and those organising the assembly (see Djavit An v. Turkey, no. 20652/92, § 56, ECHR 2003-III).
• EGMR, 26.06.1986 - 8543/79

  VAN MARLE AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 06.12.1988 - 10588/83

  BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN
• EGMR, 26.04.1991 - 12398/86

  ASCH v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 33354/96

  Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Mitangeklagten als Zeugen im Sinne der …
• EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 25691/04

  BUKTA ET AUTRES c. HONGRIE
• EKMR, 15.07.1986 - 9938/82

  BRICMONT v. BELGIUM