Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PETRAKIDOU v. TURKEY

  Art. 8, Art. 14, Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 6, Art. 7, Art. 11, Art. 13, Art. 14+5, Art. 14+6, Art. 14+7 MRK
  No violation of Art. 8 No violation of Art. 14 No violation of Art. 3 No violation of Art. 5 No violation of Art. 6 No violation of Art. 7 No violation of Art. 11 No violation of Art. 13 No violation of Art. 14+5 No violation of Art. 14+6 No violation of Art. 14+7 ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 26.09.2002 - 16081/90
• EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (11)

• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  The effect of Article 13 is thus to require the provision of a domestic remedy to deal with the substance of an "arguable complaint" under the Convention and to grant appropriate relief (see, among many other authorities, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 157, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 11.06.2002 - 36042/97

  WILLIS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  The Court's case-law establishes 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, 20.02.2003 - 20652/92

  DJAVIT AN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  The Court refers, firstly, to the fundamental principles underlying its judgments relating to Article 11 (see Djavit An v. Turkey, no. 20652/92, §§ 56-57, ECHR 2003-III; Piermont v. France, 27 April 1995, §§ 76-77, Series A no. 314; and Plattform "Ärzte für das Leben" v. Austria, 21 June 1988, § 32, Series A no. 139).

 
• EGMR, 27.03.2003 - 58698/00

  PAULINO TOMAS contre le PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  The term "effective" is also considered to mean that the remedy must be adequate and accessible (see Vidas v. Croatia, no. 40383/04, § 34, 3 July 2008, and Paulino Tomás v. Portugal (dec.), no. 58698/00, ECHR 2003-VIII).
• EGMR, 16.11.2004 - 29865/96

  Diskriminierung türkischer Ehefrauen durch Verpflichtung zur Tragung des Namens …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  However, not every difference in treatment will amount to a violation of Article 14. It must be established that other persons in an analogous or relevantly similar situation enjoy preferential treatment and that this distinction is discriminatory (see Unal Tekeli v. Turkey, no. 29865/96, § 49, 16 November 2004).
• EGMR, 05.12.2006 - 74552/01

  OYA ATAMAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  It is clear from this case-law that the authorities have a duty to take appropriate measures with regard to demonstrations in order to ensure their peaceful conduct and the safety of all citizens (see Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, § 35, 5 December 2006).
• EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 25691/04

  BUKTA ET AUTRES c. HONGRIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  While an unlawful situation does not, in itself, justify an infringement of freedom of assembly (see Cisse v. France, no. 51346/99, § 50, ECHR 2002-III (extracts)), interferences with the right guaranteed by Article 11 of the Convention are in principle justified for the prevention of disorder or crime and for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others where, as in the instant case, demonstrators engage in acts of violence (see, a contrario, Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 37, 17 July 2007, and Oya Ataman, cited above, §§ 41-42).
• EGMR, 03.07.2008 - 40383/04

  VIDAS v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  The term "effective" is also considered to mean that the remedy must be adequate and accessible (see Vidas v. Croatia, no. 40383/04, § 34, 3 July 2008, and Paulino Tomás v. Portugal (dec.), no. 58698/00, ECHR 2003-VIII).
• EGMR, 27.04.1995 - 15773/89

  PIERMONT c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  The Court refers, firstly, to the fundamental principles underlying its judgments relating to Article 11 (see Djavit An v. Turkey, no. 20652/92, §§ 56-57, ECHR 2003-III; Piermont v. France, 27 April 1995, §§ 76-77, Series A no. 314; and Plattform "Ärzte für das Leben" v. Austria, 21 June 1988, § 32, Series A no. 139).
• EGMR, 21.06.1988 - 10126/82

  Plattform "Ärzte für das Leben" ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 16081/90

  The Court refers, firstly, to the fundamental principles underlying its judgments relating to Article 11 (see Djavit An v. Turkey, no. 20652/92, §§ 56-57, ECHR 2003-III; Piermont v. France, 27 April 1995, §§ 76-77, Series A no. 314; and Plattform "Ärzte für das Leben" v. Austria, 21 June 1988, § 32, Series A no. 139).
• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 15312/89

  G. c. FRANCE