Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  OLLILA v. FINLAND

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 2 MRK
  Partly admissible Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  1 (Art. 6-1) embodies, inter alia, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters (Eur. Court H.R., Golder judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18, p. 18, para. 36).
• EGMR, 20.03.1991 - 15576/89

  CRUZ VARAS ET AUTRES c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  In this respect the Convention must be interpreted as guaranteeing rights which are practical and effective as opposed to theoretical and illusory (Eur. Court H.R., Cruz Varas and Others judgment of 20 March 1991, Series A no. 201, pp. 35-36, para. 99).
• EGMR, 18.02.1991 - 12313/86

  MOUSTAQUIM c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  The necessity requirement implies that the relevant decisions must be shown to be justified by a pressing social need and, in particular, be proportionate to the legitimate aim or aims pursued (Eur.Court H.R., Moustaquim judgement of 18 February 1991, Series A no. 193, p. 19, para. 43).

 
• EGMR, 21.06.1988 - 10730/84

  BERREHAB v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  Regard should further be had to the margin of appreciation afforded to the Contracting States (Eur. Court H.R., Berrehab judgment of 21 June 1988, Series A no. 138, pp. 15-16, para. 28).
• EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78

  ASHINGDANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  1 (Art. 6-1) if it does not pursue a legitimate aim and if there is no reasonable relationship between the means employed and the aim sought to be achieved (ibid., p. 19, para. 38; Ashingdane judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 93, pp. 24-25, para. 57).
• EGMR, 26.03.1992 - 12083/86

  BELDJOUDI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  In order to be justified under the terms of paragraph 2 of Article 8 (Art. 8) such an interference must satisfy three conditions: it must be "in accordance with the law", it must pursue one or more of the aims enumerated in paragraph 2 and it must be "necessary in a democratic society" for that aim or those aims (Eur. Court H.R., Beldjoudi judgment of 26 March 1992, para. 68, to be published in Series A no. 234-A).
• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 10873/84

  TRE TRAKTÖRER AKTIEBOLAG v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  The Commission further considers that guardian S.P.'s administration of the applicant's possessions constitutes an interference with his right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions and amounts to a control of the use of his property to be examined under the second paragraph of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1) as to its lawfulness, purpose and proportionality (e.g. Eur. Court H.R., Tre Traktörer AB judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 159, pp. 22-24, paras. 55-62).
• EGMR, 24.04.1990 - 11105/84

  HUVIG c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  The degree of precision required will depend on the particular subject-matter (e.g. Eur. Court H.R., Huvig judgment of 24 April 1990, Series A no. 176-B, pp. 52-55, paras. 26 and 28-29).
• EGMR, 28.08.1992 - 13704/88

  SCHWABE v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EKMR, 30.11.1992 - 18969/91

  The Convention organs' task is to review the decisions of the national authorities from the point of view of the Convention (Eur. Court H.R., Herczegfalvy judgment of 24 September 1992, para. 63, to be published in Series A no. 242-B).