Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GODENAU v. GERMANY

  No violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) (englisch)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• hessenschau.de (Pressebericht, 29.11.2022)

  Hessen darf "Schwarze Liste" für Lehrer führen

Besprechungen u.ä.

• zeitschrift-jse.de (Fallmäßige Aufbereitung - für Studienzwecke)

  Zur Rechtmäßigkeit "schwarzer Listen" für den Staatsdienst ungeeigneter Lehrer

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  GODENAU v. GERMANY

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 14 MRK
  [ENG]

Papierfundstellen

• NVwZ 2023, 1233

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EGMR, 24.11.2005 - 27574/02

  OTTO v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  The party is generally considered to be right-wing and has been under scrutiny by the offices for the protection of the Constitution (Verfassungsschutzämter) in various German Länder; it has not, however, been declared unconstitutional by the Federal Constitutional Court under Article 21 § 2 of the German Basic Law (for earlier cases concerning members of that party, see Otto v. Germany (dec.), no. 27574/02, 24 November 2005, and Erdel v. Germany (dec.), no. 30067/04, 13 February 2007).

  According to the well-established case-law of the Court, the right to recruitment to civil service had deliberately been omitted from the Convention and as such the refusal to appoint a person as a civil servant could not provide the basis for a complaint under the Convention (they referred to, inter alia, Glasenapp v. Germany, 28 August 1986, § 48, Series A no. 104; Wille v. Liechtenstein [GC], no. 28396/95, § 41, ECHR 1999-VII; and Otto v. Germany (dec.), no. 27574/02, 24 November 2005).

• EGMR, 15.10.2020 - 40495/15

  Polizeiliche Tatprovokation (Begriff: mittelbare Tatprovokation - Bestimmtsein …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  The Court reiterates that in order to lodge an application in accordance with Article 34 of the Convention, an individual must be able to show that he or she was "directly affected" by the measure complained of (see Akbay and Others v. Germany, nos. 40495/15 and 2 others, § 67, 15 October 2020, with further references).
• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

  CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  Having regard to the facts of the case and the parties" submissions, which essentially referred to the arguments they had made in respect of Article 10, its findings under that latter provision and the parallels it has drawn in its assessments under Articles 10 and 11 in earlier cases concerning the dismissal of teachers (see, for example, Volkmer, cited above), the Court considers that it has examined the main legal questions raised in the present application, and that there is thus no need to give a separate ruling on the remaining complaints (see, mutatis mutandis, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014).

 
• EGMR, 22.11.2001 - 39799/98

  Rechtmäßigkeit der Entlassung eines Lehrers wegen mangelnder persönlicher Eignung …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  The Court has already recognised in earlier cases that the duty of loyalty to the Constitution imposed on civil servants and public employees under German law was an expression of a "democracy capable of defending itself" and that restrictions on the freedom of expression of teachers deriving from that duty of loyalty pursued legitimate aims under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention, notably the prevention of disorder and the protection of the rights of others (see Vogt, cited above, § 51, and Volkmer v. Germany (dec.), no. 39799/98, 22 November 2001).
• EGMR, 07.07.2020 - 57462/19

  MAHI c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  In subsequent cases concerning teachers, the Court did not delve into the question whether their status under the relevant domestic law was that of civil servants or other public employees and instead focused on their role as teachers, being a symbol of authority for their pupils in the field of education, and reiterated that the particular duties and responsibilities incumbent on them also applied to a certain extent to their activities outside school (see Mahi v. Belgium (dec.), no. 57462/19, § 32, 7 July 2020, with further references).
• EGMR, 26.09.1995 - 17851/91

  Radikalenerlaß

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  The applicant's earlier dismissal, in respect of which a friendly settlement had been reached in the proceedings before the Wiesbaden Labour Court, was not the subject matter of the present case, distinguishing it from that in Vogt v. Germany (26 September 1995, Series A no. 323).
• BAG, 12.05.2011 - 2 AZR 479/09

  Anfechtung - außerordentliche Kündigung - politische Treuepflicht - öffentlicher …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  According to the well-established case-law of the domestic courts, the suitability for employment in public service within the meaning of Article 33(2) of the Basic Law entails a duty of loyalty to the Constitution (see, for example, Federal Labour Court, no. 2 AZR 479/09, judgment of 12 May 2011, at para. 23 - juris, with further references).
• EGMR, 28.10.1999 - 28396/95

  Nichtberufung eines liechtensteiner Richters in das Amt des Gerichtspräsidenten …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  According to the well-established case-law of the Court, the right to recruitment to civil service had deliberately been omitted from the Convention and as such the refusal to appoint a person as a civil servant could not provide the basis for a complaint under the Convention (they referred to, inter alia, Glasenapp v. Germany, 28 August 1986, § 48, Series A no. 104; Wille v. Liechtenstein [GC], no. 28396/95, § 41, ECHR 1999-VII; and Otto v. Germany (dec.), no. 27574/02, 24 November 2005).
• EGMR, 28.08.1986 - 9228/80

  GLASENAPP c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  According to the well-established case-law of the Court, the right to recruitment to civil service had deliberately been omitted from the Convention and as such the refusal to appoint a person as a civil servant could not provide the basis for a complaint under the Convention (they referred to, inter alia, Glasenapp v. Germany, 28 August 1986, § 48, Series A no. 104; Wille v. Liechtenstein [GC], no. 28396/95, § 41, ECHR 1999-VII; and Otto v. Germany (dec.), no. 27574/02, 24 November 2005).
• EGMR, 13.01.2015 - 44230/06

  PETROPAVLOVSKIS v. LATVIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.11.2022 - 80450/17

  As evidenced by the lecture she had organised in Barcelona in 2015, the inclusion on the list in question had not deterred the applicant from continuing her political activities and expressing her views, which meant that the impugned measure had not had a chilling effect on her (they referred to Petropavlovskis v. Latvia, no. 44230/06, § 77, ECHR 2015).
• EGMR, 13.02.2007 - 30067/04

  E. E. gegen Deutschland
• EGMR, 30.06.2020 - 58512/16

  CIMPERSEK v. SLOVENIA