Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  F.O. v. CROATIA

  Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Positive obligations;Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);Pecuniary damage - claim ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  F.O. v. CROATIA

  Art. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

• EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87

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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 29555/13

  Measures taken in the field of education may, in certain circumstances, affect the right to respect for private life, but not every act or measure which may be said to affect adversely the moral integrity of a person necessarily gives rise to such an interference (see Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C).

• EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 215/19

  Diskriminierung: Deutschland hat Racial-Profiling-Vorwurf nicht genug geprüft

  In this context, it is important to reiterate that the State enjoys a margin of appreciation in determining the manner in which to organise its system to ensure compliance with the Convention (compare, mutatis mutandis, F.O. v. Croatia, no. 29555/13, § 91, 22 April 2021).
• EGMR, 18.10.2022 - 34085/17

  MUHAMMAD v. SPAIN

  In its case-law, the Court has already held in many cases that the authorities" positive obligations under the Convention may include a duty to establish an adequate legal framework affording protection of vulnerable people (see Öneryildiz v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, § 89, ECHR 2004-XII, concerning Article 2 of the Convention; Volodina v. Russia, no. 41261/17, §§ 77 and 85, 9 July 2019, and O'Keeffe v. Ireland [GC], no. 35810/09, § 148, ECHR 2014 (extracts), relating to Article 3 of the Convention; Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, no. 25965/04, § 285, ECHR 2010 (extracts), as regards Article 4 of the Convention; and Söderman v. Sweden [GC], no. 5786/08, §§ 80 and 89, ECHR 2013, and F.O. v. Croatia, no. 29555/13, § 91, 22 April 2021, regarding Article 8 of the Convention) or providing effective safeguards against arbitrariness by State agents (see Giuliani and Gaggio v. Italy [GC], no. 23458/02, § 209, ECHR 2011 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 16.11.2023 - 3041/19

  G.T.B. v. SPAIN

  The Court has already recognised that measures taken in the field of education may, in certain circumstances, affect the right to respect for private life (see F.O. v. Croatia, no. 29555/13, § 81, 22 April 2021).
• EGMR, 11.04.2023 - 46519/20

  T.H. v. BULGARIA

  It is also true that under Article 8 of the Convention the national authorities must take steps to ensure zero tolerance to any violence or abuse in educational institutions (see F.O. v. Croatia, no. 29555/13, § 91, 22 April 2021).
• EGMR - 4666/16 (anhängig)

  TOMA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  Did the treatment complained of have an adverse effect on the applicant's psychological or moral integrity sufficient to raise an issue pertaining to his right to respect for private life within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention, justifying the application of this provision (see for example, F.O. v. Croatia, no. 29555/13, §§ 57-61, 22 April 2021) and/or with his freedom of thought, conscience or religion, within the meaning of Article 9 § 1 of the Convention (see Grzelak v. Poland, no. 7710/02, §§ 85-87, 15 June 2010)? If so, has there been a breach of either of these provisions, in view of the State's alleged failure to ensure protection of his enjoyment of these rights (see, mutatis mutandis, Burlya and Others v. Ukraine, no. 3289/10, §§ 160-163, 6 November 2018)?.