Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MALINEN v. FINLAND

  Art. 7, Art. 8, Art. 10, Art. 35 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  MALINEN v. FINLAND

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

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 03.04.2007 - 62617/00

  Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte schützt private Nutzung des Internets

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 20237/12

  In such circumstances the applicant might expect the correspondence he receives to be protected by Article 8 of the Convention (compare and contrast Copland v. the United Kingdom, no. 62617/00, §§ 41-42, ECHR 2007-I).
• EGMR, 26.05.1994 - 16969/90

  KEEGAN v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 20237/12

  In both contexts regard must be had to the fair balance that has to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and of the community as a whole; and in both contexts the State enjoys a certain margin of appreciation (see Keegan v. Ireland, 26 May 1994, § 49, Series A no. 290; and Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands, cited above).
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72

  SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 20237/12

  In this context the Court reiterates its case-law where it has been held that a delay of three weeks or a month in sending a letter by the prison authorities while seeking instructions from a higher authority is still considered reasonable (see Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, § 104, Series A no. 61; and McCallum v. the United Kingdom, no. 9511/81, Commission's report of 4 May 1989, §§ 57-59).

 
• EGMR, 07.02.2002 - 53176/99

  MIKULIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 20237/12

  These obligations may involve the adoption of measures designed to secure respect for rights even in the sphere of the relations of individuals between themselves (see, for example, Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands, 27 October 1994, § 31, Series A no. 297-C; and Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, § 57, ECHR 2002-I).
• EGMR, 27.10.1994 - 18535/91

  KROON AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 20237/12

  These obligations may involve the adoption of measures designed to secure respect for rights even in the sphere of the relations of individuals between themselves (see, for example, Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands, 27 October 1994, § 31, Series A no. 297-C; and Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, § 57, ECHR 2002-I).
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92

  HOKKANEN v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 20237/12

  The Court reiterates that its task is not to substitute itself for the competent domestic authorities in regulating prisoners" correspondence at the national level, but rather to review under the Convention the decisions that those authorities have taken in the exercise of their power of appreciation (see Helander v. Finland (dec.), no. 10410/10, § 50, 10 September 2013; and, mutatis mutandis, Rózanski v. Poland, no. 55339/00, § 62, 18 May 2006; Mikulic v. Croatia, cited above, § 59; and Hokkanen v. Finland, 23 September 1994, § 55, Series A no. 299-A).