Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M. c. REPUBLIQUE FEDERALE D'ALLEMAGNE

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2 Abs. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs... . 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 2, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M. v. the FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2 Abs. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs... . 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 2, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (8)

• EGMR, 27.11.2012 - 29713/05

  STAMOSE v. BULGARIA

  In previous cases under Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 the Court (or the former European Commission of Human Rights) has been concerned with such bans imposed in connection with pending criminal proceedings (see Schmid v. Austria, no. 10670/83, Commission decision of 9 July 1985, Decisions and Reports (DR) 44, p. 195; Baumann v. France, no. 33592/96, ECHR 2001-V; Földes and Földesné Hajlik v. Hungary, no. 41463/02, ECHR 2006-XII; Sissanis v. Romania, no. 23468/02, 25 January 2007; Bessenyei v. Hungary, no. 37509/06, 21 October 2008; A.E. v. Poland, no. 14480/04, 31 March 2009; Iordan Iordanov and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 23530/02, 2 July 2009; Makedonski v. Bulgaria, no. 36036/04, 20 January 2011; Pfeifer v. Bulgaria, no. 24733/04, 17 February 2011; Prescher v. Bulgaria, no. 6767/04, 7 June 2011; and Miazdzyk v. Poland, no. 23592/07, 24 January 2012), enforcement of criminal sentences (see M. v. Germany, no. 10307/83, Commission decision of 6 March 1984, DR 37, p. 113), lack of rehabilitation in respect of criminal offences (see Nalbantski v. Bulgaria, no. 30943/04, 10 February 2011), pending bankruptcy proceedings (see Luordo v. Italy, no. 32190/96, ECHR 2003-IX), refusal to pay customs penalties (see Napijalo v. Croatia, no. 66485/01, 13 November 2003), failure to pay taxes (see Riener v. Bulgaria, no. 46343/99, 23 May 2006), failure to pay judgment debts to private persons (see Ignatov v. Bulgaria, no. 50/02, 2 July 2009, and Gochev v. Bulgaria, no. 34383/03, 26 November 2009), knowledge of "State secrets" (see Bartik v. Russia, no. 55565/00, ECHR 2006-XV), failure to comply with military-service obligations (see Peltonen v. Finland, no. 19583/92, Commission decision of 20 February 1995, DR 80-a, p. 38, and Marangos v. Cyprus, no. 31106/96, Commission decision of 20 May 1997, unreported), mental illness coupled with a lack of arrangements for appropriate care in the destination country (see Nordblad v. Sweden, no. 19076/91, Commission decision of 13 October 1993, unreported), and court orders prohibiting minor children from being removed to a foreign country (see Roldan Texeira and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 40655/98, 26 October 2000, and Diamante and Pelliccioni v. San Marino, no. 32250/08, 27 September 2011).
• EKMR, 04.03.1998 - 29691/96

  JEDAMSKI v. POLAND

  As a result, to require an accused or convicted person to provide financial guarantees in order to be released does not raise an issue under the first paragraph of this provision but, at the most, may fall under the second paragraph (No. 10307/83, Dec. 6.3.84, D.R. 37, p. 113).
• EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 30943/04

  NALBANTSKI v. BULGARIA

  The decision to take away the applicant's international passport clearly amounted to such a measure (see M. v. Germany, no. 10307/83, Commission decision of 6 March 1984, Decisions and Reports (DR) 37, p. 113; Peltonen v. Finland, no. 19583/92, Commission decision of 20 February 1995, DR 80-a, p. 38; Baumann v. France, no. 33592/96, §§ 62 and 63, ECHR 2001-V; Napijalo v. Croatia, no. 66485/01, § 69, 13 November 2003; and Ignatov, cited above, § 33).

 
• EKMR, 06.04.1994 - 20774/92

  HOOS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  In this respect the Commission refers to its established case-law (cf. No. 1103/61, Yearbook 5 pp. 168, 186; No 5574/72, Dec. 21.3.75, D.R. 3 pp. 10, 15; No. 10307/83, Dec. 6.3.84, D.R. 37 pp. 113, 120).
• EKMR, 11.05.1992 - 15243/89

  A. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  In this respect the Commission refers to its established case-law (cf. No. 5574/72, Dec. 21.3.75, D.R. 3 p. 10; No. 10307/83, Dec. 6.3.84, D.R. 37 p. 113; No. 11244/84, Dec. 2.3.87, D.R. 55 p. 98).
• EKMR, 13.03.1989 - 11916/86

  S. AND ; K. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  In this respect the Commission refers to its constant jurisprudence (see e.g No. 1103/61, Yearbook 5, pp. 168, 186; No. 5574/72, Dec. 21.3.75, D.R. 3, pp. 10, 15; No. 10307/83, Dec. 6.3.84, D.R. 37. pp. 113, 120).
• EKMR, 14.12.1988 - 13081/87

  WINDSOR v. the UNITED KINGDOM

  In this respect the Commission refers to its established case-law (see e.g. No. 1103/61, Yearbook 5 pp. 168, 186; No. 5574/72, Dec. 21.3.75, D.R. 3 pp. 10, 15; No. 10307/83, Dec. 6.3.84, D.R. 37 pp. 113, 120).
• EKMR, 29.06.1992 - 14852/89

  AKHTAR, JOHANGIR AND JOHANGIR v. THE NETHERLANDS

  In this respect the Commission refers to its established case-law (cf. No. 10307/83, Dec. 6.3.84, D.R. 37, pp. 113, 120; No. 11244/84, Dec. 2.3.87, D.R. 55, pp. 98, 104).