Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF PARIS v. FRANCE

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 9, Art. 9 Abs. 1, Art. 10, Art. 11, Art. 13, Art. 14 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 26.05.1994 - 16969/90

  KEEGAN v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.01.1995 - 19509/92

  Article 8 of the Convention has more an individual than a collective character, the essential object of Article 8 of the Convention being to protect the individual against arbitrary action by the public authorities (see, for example, Eur. Court H.R., Keegan judgment of 26 May 1994, Series A no. 290, pp. 17-18, para. 44; Kroon judgment of 27 October 1994, to be published in Series A no. 297-C, para. 31).
• EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13710/88

  NIEMIETZ v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.01.1995 - 19509/92

  On the other hand, where a search was directed solely against business activities, the Court did not invoke such a consideration as a ground for excluding the applicability of Article 8 under the heading of "private life" (see Eur. Court H.R., Chappell judgement of 30 March 1989, Series A no. 152-A, pp. 12-13, para. 26 and pp. 21-22, para. 51; Niemitz judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 251-B, p. 33, para. 29).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.01.1995 - 19509/92

  It only applies if the individual can be said to have an "arguable claim" of a violation of the Convention (Eur. Court H.R., Boyle and Rice judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, p.23, para. 52).

 
• EGMR, 30.03.1989 - 10461/83

  CHAPPELL c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.01.1995 - 19509/92

  On the other hand, where a search was directed solely against business activities, the Court did not invoke such a consideration as a ground for excluding the applicability of Article 8 under the heading of "private life" (see Eur. Court H.R., Chappell judgement of 30 March 1989, Series A no. 152-A, pp. 12-13, para. 26 and pp. 21-22, para. 51; Niemitz judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 251-B, p. 33, para. 29).
• EGMR, 27.10.1994 - 18535/91

  KROON AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.01.1995 - 19509/92

  Article 8 of the Convention has more an individual than a collective character, the essential object of Article 8 of the Convention being to protect the individual against arbitrary action by the public authorities (see, for example, Eur. Court H.R., Keegan judgment of 26 May 1994, Series A no. 290, pp. 17-18, para. 44; Kroon judgment of 27 October 1994, to be published in Series A no. 297-C, para. 31).
• EKMR, 05.05.1979 - 7805/77

  X. and CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.01.1995 - 19509/92

  It is true that under Article 9 of the Convention a church is capable of possessing and exercising the right to freedom of religion in its own capacity as a representative of its members and the entire functioning of churches depends on respect for this right (see No. 7805/77, Dec. 5.5.79, D.R. 16 pp. 68, 70).