Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AKABBOUZ v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 13, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EKMR, 08.09.1988 - 13654/88

  R. v. the NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  However, in view of the right to respect for family life ensured by Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, the exclusion of a person from a country in which his immediate family resides may raise an issue under this provision of the Convention (cf., for example, No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219, No. 8245/78, Dec. 6.5.81, D.R. 24 p. 98 and No. 13654/88, Dec. 8.9.88, D.R. 57 pp. 287, 289).

  The Commission considers, despite the humanitarian aspect of the case, that in the present circumstances respect for the applicant's family life does not outweigh valid considerations relating to Dutch immigration policy (cf. No. 13654/88, Dec. 8.9.88, D.R. 57 p. 287).

• EKMR, 10.12.1986 - 12461/86

  Y. H. v. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  The Commission has repeatedly held that no right of an alien to enter or to reside in a particular country, nor a right not to be expelled from a particular country, is as such guaranteed by the Convention (see No. 12461/86, Dec. 10.12.86, D.R. 51, pp. 258, 264).

  This may be so even if the danger does not emanate from public authorities for whom the receiving State is responsible (No. 12461/86, Dec. 10.12.86, D.R. 51 p. 258, No. 21350/93, Dec. 13.10.93, unpublished).

• EKMR, 13.10.1993 - 21350/93

  SOMADO v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  This may be so even if the danger does not emanate from public authorities for whom the receiving State is responsible (No. 12461/86, Dec. 10.12.86, D.R. 51 p. 258, No. 21350/93, Dec. 13.10.93, unpublished).

 
• EGMR, 21.06.1988 - 10730/84

  BERREHAB v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  2 (Art. 8-2) of the Convention (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Berrehab judgment of 21 June 1988, Series A no. 138, p. 15, para. 26).
• EGMR, 20.03.1991 - 15576/89

  CRUZ VARAS ET AUTRES c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  The Commission recalls that the decision by a Contracting State to expel an individual can, in certain circumstances, prove to be in breach of the Convention and particularly of Article 3 (Art. 3), when there are serious reasons to believe that he or she could be subjected to treatment prohibited by the said Article 3 (Art. 3) in the State to which he or she would be sent (see e.g. No. 6315/73, Dec. 30.9.74, D.R. 1 p. 73; No. 7011/75, Dec. 3.10.75, D.R. 4 p. 215; No. 12122/86, Dec. 16.10.86, D.R. 50 p. 268; Eur. Court H.R. Cruz Varas judgment of 20 March 1991, Series A no. 201, paras. 69-70).
• EKMR, 19.05.1977 - 7816/77

  X. et Y. c. REPUBLIQUE FEDERALE D'ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  However, in view of the right to respect for family life ensured by Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, the exclusion of a person from a country in which his immediate family resides may raise an issue under this provision of the Convention (cf., for example, No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219, No. 8245/78, Dec. 6.5.81, D.R. 24 p. 98 and No. 13654/88, Dec. 8.9.88, D.R. 57 pp. 287, 289).
• EKMR, 06.05.1981 - 8245/78

  K. c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  However, in view of the right to respect for family life ensured by Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, the exclusion of a person from a country in which his immediate family resides may raise an issue under this provision of the Convention (cf., for example, No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219, No. 8245/78, Dec. 6.5.81, D.R. 24 p. 98 and No. 13654/88, Dec. 8.9.88, D.R. 57 pp. 287, 289).
• EKMR, 08.12.1981 - 9478/81

  X. v. the FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  Relationships between adults do not necessarily attract the protection of Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention without further elements of dependency, involving more than the normal emotional ties (cf. No. 9478/81, Dec. 8.12.81, D.R. 27 p. 243).
• EKMR, 03.10.1975 - 7011/75

  BECKER c. DANEMARK

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  The Commission recalls that the decision by a Contracting State to expel an individual can, in certain circumstances, prove to be in breach of the Convention and particularly of Article 3 (Art. 3), when there are serious reasons to believe that he or she could be subjected to treatment prohibited by the said Article 3 (Art. 3) in the State to which he or she would be sent (see e.g. No. 6315/73, Dec. 30.9.74, D.R. 1 p. 73; No. 7011/75, Dec. 3.10.75, D.R. 4 p. 215; No. 12122/86, Dec. 16.10.86, D.R. 50 p. 268; Eur. Court H.R. Cruz Varas judgment of 20 March 1991, Series A no. 201, paras. 69-70).
• EKMR, 30.09.1974 - 6315/73

  X. v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

  Auszug aus EKMR, 11.01.1994 - 18056/91

  The Commission recalls that the decision by a Contracting State to expel an individual can, in certain circumstances, prove to be in breach of the Convention and particularly of Article 3 (Art. 3), when there are serious reasons to believe that he or she could be subjected to treatment prohibited by the said Article 3 (Art. 3) in the State to which he or she would be sent (see e.g. No. 6315/73, Dec. 30.9.74, D.R. 1 p. 73; No. 7011/75, Dec. 3.10.75, D.R. 4 p. 215; No. 12122/86, Dec. 16.10.86, D.R. 50 p. 268; Eur. Court H.R. Cruz Varas judgment of 20 March 1991, Series A no. 201, paras. 69-70).
• EKMR, 16.10.1986 - 12122/86

  L. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 08.07.1985 - 10142/82

  U. c. LUXEMBOURG

• EKMR, 18.10.1995 - 26400/95

  ÖZTÜRK v. AUSTRIA

  2 (Art. 8-2), namely the prevention of disorder and the preservation of the country's economic well-being (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Berrehab judgment of 21 June 1988, Series A no. 138, p. 15, para. 26; No. 18056/91, Dec. 11.1.94, unpublished).