Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  X. v. the UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 14, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  X. c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 14, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (42)

• EKMR, 29.06.1992 - 19628/92

  BIBI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  The Commission recalls that whilst the Convention does not guarantee a right, as such, to enter a particular country, the exclusion of a person from a country where his or her close relatives reside may raise an issue under Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention (eg. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28 p. 160, and No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29 p. 205).
• EKMR, 12.01.1998 - 26336/95

  ABOIKONIE ET READ c. PAYS-BAS

  The Commission recalls its established case-law which holds that while Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention does not in itself guarantee a right to enter or remain in a particular country, issues may arise where a person is excluded, or removed from a country where his close relatives reside or have the right to reside (see eg. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9, p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28, p. 160; and No. 9285/81, Dec. 8.7.82, D.R. 29, p. 205).
• EKMR, 15.05.1996 - 25918/94

  ALTUNTAS v. AUSTRIA

  The Commission recalls according to its established case-law that while Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention does not in itself guarantee a right to enter or remain in a particular country issues may arise where a person is excluded, or removed from a country where his close relatives reside (see eg. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9, p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28, p. 160, and No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29, p. 205).

 
• EKMR, 06.07.1992 - 19788/92

  S. V. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  The present case raises an issue under Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention for, whilst the Convention does not guarantee a right, as such, to enter or remain in a particular country, the Commission has constantly held that the exclusion of a person from a country where his close relatives reside may raise an issue under this provision (e.g. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28 p. 160; and No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29 p. 205).
• EKMR, 10.02.1990 - 16106/90

  B. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Whilst the Convention does not guarantee a right, as such, to enter and remain in a particular country, the Commission has constantly held that the exclusion of a person from a country where members of his close family reside may raise an issue under Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention (see, e.g. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219, No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28 p. 160 and No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29 p. 205).
• EKMR, 10.07.1998 - 36287/97

  MOMIQUE-POLA v. SWEDEN

  An issue may arise under Article 8 (Art. 8) if a person is excluded, or removed, from a country where his close relatives reside or have the right to reside (see eg. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9, p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28, p. 160; No. 9285/81, Dec. 8.7.82, D.R. 29, p. 205).
• EKMR, 14.04.1998 - 31934/96

  HÄRGINEN v. FINLAND

  An issue may nevertheless arise under Article 8 (Art. 8) if a person is excluded, or removed, from a country where his close relatives reside or have the right to reside (see eg. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9, p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28, p. 160; No. 9285/81, Dec. 8.7.82, D.R. 29, p. 205).
• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 32339/96

  GORMAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  The Commission recalls according to its established case-law that while Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention does not in itself guarantee a right to enter or remain in a particular country, issues may arise where a person is excluded, or removed from a country where his close relatives reside or have the right to reside (see eg. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9, p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28, p. 160 and No. 9285/81, Dec. 8.7.82, D.R. 29, p. 205).
• EKMR, 04.09.1996 - 24723/94

  PATEL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  The present case may raise an issue under Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention for, whilst the Convention does not guarantee a right, as such, to enter or remain in a particular country, the Commission has constantly held that the exclusion of a person from a country where his close relatives reside may raise an issue under this provision (e.g. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9, p.219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28, p. 160, and No. 9285/81, Dec. 8.7.82, D.R. 29, p. 205).
• EKMR, 16.01.1996 - 25297/94

  P.P. AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  The Commission recalls according to its established case-law that, while Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention does not in itself guarantee a right to enter or remain in a particular country, issues may arise where a person is excluded or removed from a country where his close relatives reside or have the right to reside (see eg. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9, p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28, p. 160, and No. 9285/81, Dec. 8.7.82, D.R. 29, p. 205).
• EKMR, 16.01.1996 - 26290/95

  BIBI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 29.11.1995 - 26922/95

  EBIBOMI AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 23.10.1995 - 23938/94

  SORABJEE v. the UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 31.08.1994 - 24381/94

  KAMARA v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 29.06.1994 - 23974/94

  BALBASTRO AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 30.06.1993 - 20598/92

  MAHFAZ v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 31.03.1993 - 19546/92

  MIAH, ISLAM v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 08.01.1993 - 19789/92

  SMITH AND FORREST v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 06.01.1993 - 20100/92

  A.K. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 12.10.1992 - 20118/92

  F.P. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 01.07.1992 - 19153/91

  M. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 13.05.1992 - 19476/92

  B. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 01.04.1992 - 18713/91

  C. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 19.02.1992 - 17504/90

  BABUL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 19.02.1992 - 17531/90

  G. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 19.02.1992 - 19186/91

  A. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 13.02.1992 - 17229/90

  N.A. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 05.10.1990 - 14984/89

  DE ALWIS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 07.09.1990 - 16382/90

  M. v. UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 06.09.1990 - 16324/90

  S. v. UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 04.04.1990 - 14742/89

  ODEDRA v. UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 09.10.1989 - 14753/89

  C. and L.M. v. UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 09.05.1989 - 14416/88

  B. ; S. ; AND K. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 14.12.1988 - 14069/88

  PATEL v. UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 14.12.1988 - 14112/88

  KHANAM v. the UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 15.07.1988 - 13718/88

  C. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 09.12.1987 - 13031/87

  B. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 17.01.1997 - 28627/95

  DABHI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 15.05.1996 - 26985/95

  POKU AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 23.10.1995 - 24865/94

  JARAMILLO v. the UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 22.10.1998 - 35693/97

  PATEL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 02.09.1992 - 19319/91

  O. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM