Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GUSTAVSSON v. SWEDEN

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. b, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 2, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 9, Art. 10, Art. 13, Art. 34 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 13.06.1979 - 6833/74

  MARCKX v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21009/92

  The Commission recalls that "family life" within the meaning of Article 8 (Art. 8) may include at least the ties between near relatives such as grandparents and grandchildren (e.g., Eur. Court H.R., Marckx judgment of 13 June 1979, Series A no. 31, p. 21, para. 45).
• EGMR, 24.11.1986 - 9120/80

  UNTERPERTINGER v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21009/92

  1 (Art. 6-1) (cf. e.g., Eur. Court H.R., Unterpertinger judgment of 24 November 1986, Series A no. 110, p. 14, para. 29).
• EGMR, 20.03.1991 - 15576/89

  CRUZ VARAS ET AUTRES c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21009/92

  In this respect the Convention must be interpreted as guaranteeing rights which are practical and effective as opposed to theoretical and illusory (e.g., Eur. Court H.R., Cruz Varas and Others judgment of 20 March 1991, Series A no. 201, pp. 35-36, para. 99).

 
• EGMR, 24.04.1990 - 11801/85

  KRUSLIN c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21009/92

  In a sphere covered by written law, the "law" is the enactment in force as the competent courts have interpreted it (cf., e.g., Eur. Court H.R., Kruslin judgment of 24 April 1990, Series A no. 176-A, pp. 21-22, para. 29).
• EGMR, 24.03.1988 - 10465/83

  OLSSON v. SWEDEN (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21009/92

  Regard must also be had to the margin of appreciation left to the Contracting States (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Olsson judgment of 24 March 1988, Series A no. 130, pp. 31-32, para. 67).
• EGMR, 28.01.1994 - 17549/90

  HURTADO c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21009/92

  The Commission's task is to ascertain whether the proceedings in their entirety were fair (cf., e.g., Eur. Court H.R., Stanford judgment of 23 February 1994, Series A no. 280-A, para. 24).
• EGMR, 19.03.1991 - 11069/84

  CARDOT c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21009/92

  A complaint to the Commission must therefore have been made at least in substance in the proceedings before the competent domestic organs (e.g., Eur. Court H.R., Cardot judgment of 19 March 1991, Series A no. 200, p. 18, para. 34).
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92

  HOKKANEN v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EKMR, 05.04.1995 - 21009/92

  The second applicant is the child of the first applicant in his marriage to S. The first and the second applicant therefore constitute a "family" ipso jure (e.g., Eur. Court H.R., Hokkanen judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299-A, para. 54).