Rechtsprechung
| EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1996,31223) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (12)
- EKMR, 02.04.1993 - 18601/91
ESBESTER v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
The Commission recalls however that " an individual may, under certain conditions, claim to be a victim of a violation occasioned by the mere existence of secret measures without having to allege that such measures were in fact applied to him" (Eur. Court HR, Klass v. Germany judgment of 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28, p. 18 para. 34; No. 18601/91, Dec. 2.4.1993 (unpublished)).It is sufficient, in the area of secret measures, that the existence of practices permitting secret surveillance be established and that there is a reasonable likelihood that the Security Service has compiled and retained information concerning his private life (see. e.g. Nos. 18601/91, Dec. 4.4.1993, 20271/92, Dec. 1.9.1993, 20317/92, Dec 1.9.1993 (unpublished) with further references).
- EGMR, 02.08.1984 - 8691/79
MALONE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
On 10 April 1986 the Interception of Communications Act 1985 ("the 1985 Act") came into force in the United Kingdom pursuant to the judgment of the Court in the Malone case (Eur. Court H.R., Malone judgment of 2 August 1984, Series A no. 82).Similarly, in the Malone case, the Court agreed with the Commission that the existence of laws and practices permitting and establishing a system for effecting secret surveillance amounted in itself to an interference with the applicant's rights under Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, apart from any measures actually taken against him (Eur. Court HR, Malone v. United Kingdom judgment of 2 August 1984, Series A no. 82, p. 31, para. 64).
- EGMR, 06.09.1978 - 5029/71
Klass u.a. ./. Deutschland
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
The Commission recalls however that'an individual may, under certain conditions, claim to be a victim of a violation occasioned by the mere existence of secret measures without having to allege that such measures were in fact applied to him" (Eur. Court HR, Klass v. Germany judgment of 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28, p. 18 para. 34; No. 18601/91, Dec. 2.4.1993 (unpublished)).
- EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70
GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
The Commission recalls that everyone has the right to have any claim relating to his civil rights or obligations brought before a court or tribunal (Eur. Court HR, Golder v. United Kingdom judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18, p 18, para. 36). - EKMR, 01.09.1993 - 20271/92
REDGRAVE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
It is sufficient, in the area of secret measures, that the existence of practices permitting secret surveillance be established and that there is a reasonable likelihood that the Security Service has compiled and retained information concerning his private life (see. e.g. Nos. 18601/91, Dec. 4.4.1993, 20271/92, Dec. 1.9.1993, 20317/92, Dec 1.9.1993 (unpublished) with further references). - EKMR, 01.09.1993 - 20317/92
HEWITT AND HARMAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
It is sufficient, in the area of secret measures, that the existence of practices permitting secret surveillance be established and that there is a reasonable likelihood that the Security Service has compiled and retained information concerning his private life (see. e.g. Nos. 18601/91, Dec. 4.4.1993, 20271/92, Dec. 1.9.1993, 20317/92, Dec 1.9.1993 (unpublished) with further references). - EKMR, 27.06.1994 - 21482/93
CHRISTIE c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
The Commission recalls its findings in Christie v. United Kingdom (No. 21482/93, Dec. 27.6.94, D.R. 78-A p. 119) that insofar as any interception was carried out pursuant to a warrant issued in accordance with s. 2(2)(a) of the 1985 Act (that is in the interests of national security), the 1985 Act, if properly applied, provides a framework of safeguards against any arbitrary or unreasonable use of statutory powers in respect of an individual and satisfies the threshold requirements of Article 8 para. - EKMR, 19.04.1991 - 14324/88
RUIZ-MATEOS ; AUTRES contre l'ESPAGNE
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
However, in interpreting the concept of civil rights and obligations, the Convention organs cannot create substantive rights which have no basis in the domestic law of the State concerned (No. 14324/88, Dec. 19.4.91, D.R. 69, p. 227 with further references). - EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72
SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
The Commission recalls that where interference is alleged in the communication of information by correspondence Article 8 (Art. 8) is the lex specialis and no separate issue arises under Article 10 (Art. 10) of the Convention (cf. Eur. Court HR, Silver and others v. United Kingdom, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, p. 9, paras. 106-107; No. 13590/88, Dec. 8.11.1989, D.R. 63 pp. 174-180). - EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 9310/81
POWELL ET RAYNER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EKMR, 16.10.1996 - 28576/95
The Commission recalls that Article 13 (Art. 13) of the Convention requires a remedy in domestic law only in respect of grievances which can be regarded as "arguable" in terms of the Convention (Eur. Court H.R., Powell and Rayner v. United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 172, p.14, para. 31). - EGMR, 24.04.1990 - 11105/84
HUVIG c. FRANCE
- EGMR, 25.03.1992 - 13590/88
CAMPBELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 04.12.2015 - 47143/06
EGMR verurteilt Russland wegen geheimer Telefonüberwachung
La Cour a déjà jugé que, si l'existence d'un régime de surveillance peut porter atteinte à la vie privée, une plainte selon laquelle cela a engendré la violation de droits ne peut être portée en justice que s'il y a une « probabilité raisonnable " qu'une personne a effectivement fait l'objet d'une surveillance illégale (Esbester c. Royaume-Uni, no 18601/91, décision de la Commission du 2 avril 1993, Redgrave c. Royaume-Uni, no 202711/92, décision de la Commission du 1er septembre 1993, et Matthews c. Royaume-Uni, no 28576/95, décision de la Commission du 16 octobre 1996).