Rechtsprechung
| EKMR, 04.03.1998 - 38570/97 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1998,31117) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
HINDRICHS v. GERMANY
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 14 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EKMR, 24.06.1996 - 29742/96
KUCHE c. ALLEMAGNE
Auszug aus EKMR, 04.03.1998 - 38570/97
However, the scope of review by the Convention organs is limited and it is in the first place for the national authorities, notably the courts, to interpret and apply domestic law (see Eur. Court HR, Winterwerp v. the Netherlands judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, p. 18, para. 39, p. 20, paras. 45-46; No. 9997/82, Dec. 7.12.82, D.R. 31, p. 245; No. 29742/96, Dec. 24.6.96, D.R. 86-A, p. 163).The Commission has already found that, apart from the question whether individuals in these two groups were in analogous situations, the difference of treatment between them, in the application of the laws in force, had an objective and reasonable justification and did not amount to discrimination on political grounds (cf. No. 29742/96, Dec. 24.6.96, D.R. 86-A, p. 163).
- EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73
WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS
Auszug aus EKMR, 04.03.1998 - 38570/97
However, the scope of review by the Convention organs is limited and it is in the first place for the national authorities, notably the courts, to interpret and apply domestic law (see Eur. Court HR, Winterwerp v. the Netherlands judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, p. 18, para. 39, p. 20, paras. 45-46; No. 9997/82, Dec. 7.12.82, D.R. 31, p. 245; No. 29742/96, Dec. 24.6.96, D.R. 86-A, p. 163). - EGMR, 24.05.1989 - 10486/83
HAUSCHILDT c. DANEMARK
Auszug aus EKMR, 04.03.1998 - 38570/97
As regards the applicant's complaint under Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention about the alleged lack of impartiality of the judges sitting in the proceedings against him, the Commission has had regard to the relevant criteria established in the case-law of the Convention organs (Eur. Court HR, Hauschildt v. Denmark judgment of 14 May 1989, Series A no. 154, p. 21, para. 64; Thomann v. Switzerland judgment of 10 June 1996, Reports 1996-III, No. 11, p. 815, para. 30). - EGMR, 28.10.1987 - 8695/79
Inze ./. Österreich
Auszug aus EKMR, 04.03.1998 - 38570/97
There can be no room for application of Article 14 (Art. 14) unless the facts of the case fall within the ambit of one or more of such provisions (Eur. Court HR, Inze v. Austria judgment of 28 October 1987, Series A no. 126, p. 17, para. 36). - EKMR, 07.12.1982 - 9997/82
X. c. REPUBLIQUE FEDERALE D'ALLEMAGNE
Auszug aus EKMR, 04.03.1998 - 38570/97
However, the scope of review by the Convention organs is limited and it is in the first place for the national authorities, notably the courts, to interpret and apply domestic law (see Eur. Court HR, Winterwerp v. the Netherlands judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, p. 18, para. 39, p. 20, paras. 45-46; No. 9997/82, Dec. 7.12.82, D.R. 31, p. 245; No. 29742/96, Dec. 24.6.96, D.R. 86-A, p. 163).