Rechtsprechung
| EKMR, 08.04.1994 - 15533/89 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1994,19830) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ENGLUND ET AUTRES c. SUEDE
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 11+17, Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 17 MRK
Irrecevable (französisch) - Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ENGLUND AND OTHERS v. SWEDEN
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 11+17, Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1, Art. 17 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 13.08.1981 - 7601/76
YOUNG, JAMES ET WEBSTER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EKMR, 08.04.1994 - 15533/89
Permitting every kind of compulsion in the field of trade union membership would strike at the very substance of the freedom Article 11 (Art. 11) is intended to guarantee (Eur. Court H.R., Young, James and Webster judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, pp. 21-22, para. 52). - EGMR, 20.04.1993 - 14327/88
SIBSON c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EKMR, 08.04.1994 - 15533/89
In these particular circumstances the Commission concludes that there has been no failure on the part of the respondent State to actively provide protection to the applicants against interference with their negative freedom of association (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Sibson judgment of 20 April 1993, Series A no. 258-A, p. 14, para. 29). - EGMR, 30.06.1993 - 16130/90
SIGURÐUR A. SIGURJÓNSSON v. ICELAND
Auszug aus EKMR, 08.04.1994 - 15533/89
The Commission recalls that Article 11 (Art. 11) must be viewed as encompassing a negative freedom of association, bearing in mind that the Convention must be interpreted in the light of present-day conditions (Eur. Court H.R., Sigurjónsson judgment of 30 June 1993, Series A no. 264, pp. 15-16, para. 35). - EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82
BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 08.04.1994 - 15533/89
(b) In so far as Article 13 (Art. 13) of the Convention has been invoked, the Commission considers that the applicants have no "arguable claim" of a breach of the Convention which would warrant a remedy in accordance with Article 13 (Art. 13) (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Boyle and Rice judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, pp. 23-24, paras. 52-54).