Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1988 - 12258/86

The applicants recall that the purpose of Article 6 of the Convention has been clearly explained by the Court in a number of cases, in particular the Golder case (Eur. Court H.R., Golder judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18) and the Ringeisen case, (Eur. Court H.R., Ringeisen judgment of 16 July 1971, Series A no. 13).

Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1988 - 12258/86

The applicants recall that the purpose of Article 6 of the Convention has been clearly explained by the Court in a number of cases, in particular the Golder case (Eur. Court H.R., Golder judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18) and the Ringeisen case, (Eur. Court H.R., Ringeisen judgment of 16 July 1971, Series A no. 13).

Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1988 - 12258/86

In determining whether a fair balance exists, the Contracting State enjoys a wide margin of appreciation with regard both to choosing means of enforcement and to ascertaining whether the consequences of enforcement are justified in the general interest for the purpose of achieving the object of the measure in question (Eur. Court H.R., Agosi judgment of 24 October 1986, Series A no. 108, p. 18, para. 52).

Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1988 - 12258/86

Moreover, in the Sporrong and Lönnroth judgment (Eur. Court H.R. judgment of 23 September 1982, Series A no. 52) the Court stated that it is of little consequence that the contestation (dispute) concerned an administrative measure taken by the competent body and the exercise of public authority.

Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1988 - 12258/86

The task of the Convention organs in this context is to supervise the lawfulness, purpose and proportionality of the decisions taken by the domestic authorities (cf. e.g. No. 10378/83, Dec. 7.12.83, D.R. 35 p. 235).