Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ZAMMIT AND ATTARD CASSAR v. MALTA

  Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Control of the use of property);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ZAMMIT AND ATTARD CASSAR v. MALTA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  [DEU] Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Control of the use of property);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ZAMMIT AND ATTARD CASSAR v. MALTA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (10)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 31.01.1986 - 8734/79

  BARTHOLD v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2015 - 1046/12

  In their view, this also transpired from the Court's case law (Mellacher and Others v. Austria, 19 December 1989, Series A no. 169; Pincová and Pinc v. the Czech Republic, no. 36548/97, ECHR 2002-VIII, and James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, Series A no. 98).
• EGMR, 19.12.1989 - 10522/83

  Mellacher u.a. ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2015 - 1046/12

  In their view, this also transpired from the Court's case law (Mellacher and Others v. Austria, 19 December 1989, Series A no. 169; Pincová and Pinc v. the Czech Republic, no. 36548/97, ECHR 2002-VIII, and James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, Series A no. 98).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 22774/93

  IMMOBILIARE SAFFI v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2015 - 1046/12

  Uncertainty - be it legislative, administrative or arising from practices applied by the authorities - is a factor to be taken into account in assessing the State's conduct (see Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy, [GC], no. 22774/93, § 54, ECHR 1999-V, and Broniowski, cited above, § 151).
• EGMR, 05.11.2002 - 36548/97

  PINCOVÁ ET PINC c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2015 - 1046/12

  In their view, this also transpired from the Court's case law (Mellacher and Others v. Austria, 19 December 1989, Series A no. 169; Pincová and Pinc v. the Czech Republic, no. 36548/97, ECHR 2002-VIII, and James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, Series A no. 98).

• EGMR, 02.06.2016 - 23646/09

  Keine Verletzung von Art. 11 EMRK (Recht auf Versammlungsfreiheit)

  Malta, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 1046/12, Rdnr. 47, 30.
• EGMR, 26.04.2018 - 48921/13

  CAKAREVIC v. CROATIA

  It must look behind appearances and investigate the realities of the situation complained of (see Broniowski, cited above, § 151; Hutten-Czapska v. Poland [GC], no. 35014/97, § 168, ECHR 2006-VIII; and Zammit and Attard Cassar v. Malta, no. 1046/12, § 57, 30 July 2015).
• EGMR, 09.06.2022 - 22008/20

  MARIA AZZOPARDI v. MALTA

  As the Court has previously stated in the Maltese property context, applicant's or their ancestors could not, in the 1970s and 80s, have foreseen the extent of inflation in property prices in the decades that followed (see, for example, Zammit and Attard Cassar v. Malta, no. 1046/12, § 50, 30 July 2015, and Cassar v. Malta, no. 50570/13, § 48, 30 January 2018, concerning decisions taken in 1971 and 1988 respectively).

 
• EGMR, 17.03.2022 - 24827/14

  FU QUAN, S.R.O. v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  In order for an interference to be compatible with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 it must be lawful, be in the general interest and be proportionate, that is, it must strike a "fair balance" between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual's fundamental rights (see, among many other authorities, Beyeler v. Italy [GC], no. 33202/96, § 107, ECHR 2000-I, and Zammit and Attard Cassar v. Malta, no. 1046/12, § 47, 30 July 2015).
• EGMR, 29.05.2018 - 50101/12

  BIKIC v. CROATIA

  After carrying out an overall examination of the various interests in issue (see Perdigão v. Portugal [GC], no. 24768/06, § 68, 16 November 2010), bearing in mind that the Convention is intended to safeguard rights that are "practical and effective" (see, for example, Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95, § 100, ECHR 1999-III); looking behind appearances and investigating the realities of the situation complained of (see Broniowski, cited above, § 151; Hutten-Czapska v. Poland [GC], no. 35014/97, § 168, ECHR 2006-VIII; and Zammit and Attard Cassar v. Malta, no. 1046/12, § 57, 30 July 2015) and assessing the nature of the interference, the conduct of the applicant and that of the State authorities (see Perdigão, cited above, § 68) in our view the situation created by the national authorities frustrated the applicant's legitimate expectation of being able to purchase the socially owned apartment in which she had been living for thirty years, and placed an excessive individual burden on her.
• EGMR, 12.12.2019 - 32141/10

  ROMEVA v. NORTH MACEDONIA

  It must look behind appearances and investigate the realities of the situation complained of (see Broniowski, cited above, § 151; Hutten-Czapska v. Poland [GC], no. 35014/97, § 168, ECHR 2006-VIII; and Zammit and Attard Cassar v. Malta, no. 1046/12, § 57, 30 July 2015).
• EGMR, 06.09.2016 - 72152/13

  CINDRIC AND BESLIC v. CROATIA

  It must look behind appearances and investigate the realities of the situation complained of (see Zammit and Attard Cassar v. Malta, no. 1046/12, § 57, 30 July 2015).
• EGMR, 24.10.2023 - 6335/21

  CACHIA AND OTHERS v. MALTA

  In so far as the applicants' submissions are relevant for the calculation of compensation, the Court considers that the rent control measure, although applied to commercial premises, may still be considered as being in the general interest, although the latter is less marked than in other cases, and thus a lesser deduction is justified for the purposes of compensation (see Zammit and Attard Cassar v. Malta, no. 1046/12, § 75, 30 July 2015, and Marshall and Others v. Malta, no. 79177/16, § 95, 11 February 2020).
• EGMR, 28.04.2022 - 19465/20

  GERA DE PETRI TESTAFERRATA v. MALTA

  The general principles concerning rent control as applicable in the present case have been summarized in Zammit and Attard Cassar v. Malta (no. 1046/12, §§ 57-66, 30 July 2015), and Marshall and Others v. Malta (no. 79177/16, § 39, 11 February 2020).
• EGMR - 5547/15 (anhängig)

  ORLOWSKI c. POLOGNE

  Les actes de procédure destinés à un particulier qui exerce une activité professionnelle en tant que personne physique doivent être signifiés selon les règles applicables aux particuliers, à savoir au domicile, sur un lieu de travail ou à un endroit, où le destinataire de l'acte peut être présent (arrêt de la cour d'appel de Poznan du 19 décembre 2012, I Aca 1046/12).