Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  WINER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Art. 5, Art. 6, Art. 8, Art. 10, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  W. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 5, Art. 6, Art. 8, Art. 10, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (15)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EKMR, 10.07.1980 - 8158/78

  X. v. the UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  The Government note that in X v. the United Kingdom (No. 8158/78, Dec. 10.7.80, D.R. 21 p. 95 para. 16) the Commission found that legal aid systems can only operate effectively, given the limited resources available, by establishing machinery to select which cases should be so aided.

  The Commission notes that even where legal aid may be available for certain types of civil action, it is reasonable to impose conditions on its availability involving, inter alia, the financial situation of the litigant or the prospects of success of the proceedings (cf. No. 8158/78, Dec. 10.7.80, D.R. 21 p. 95).

• EGMR, 09.10.1979 - 6289/73

  AIREY v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  The Government make the point that the Government did not "interfere" with the applicant's private life, and refer to the Airey judgment (Eur. Court H.R., judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32) in which the Court did not consider that Ireland could be said to have interfered with the applicant's private life, and where the Court also stated that the object of Article 8 is essentially to protect the individual against arbitrary interference by public authorities.
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention which guarantees a fair hearing in the determination of civil rights and obligations and, implicitly, access to court (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Golder judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18).

 
• EGMR, 15.07.1982 - 8130/78

  Eckle ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  The Commission recalls that the general rule concerning the notion of victim is that the person bringing the application must be "the person directly affected by the act or omission which is at issue, the existence of a violation being conceivable even in the absence of prejudice...'(Eur. Court H.R., Eckle judgment of 15 July 1982, Series A no. 51 para. 66).
• EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75

  SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  The Government refer to the Sporrong and Lönnroth judgment (Eur. Court of H.R., judgment of 23 September 1982, Series A no. 52, para. 69) in which the Court commented that the search for balance between the general interest of the community and the protection of individuals' fundamental rights is inherent in the whole Convention.
• EGMR, 22.10.1984 - 8790/79

  Sramek ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  In this respect, the Commission recalls the previous case-law of the Convention organs that, although positive obligations may be required by Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, the way in which a High Contracting Party may meet such obligations is largely within its discretion (cf., for example, Eur. Court H.R. Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 84 para. 67 and further references contained there).
• EKMR, 07.05.1981 - 8334/78

  X. v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  The Commission recalls in this connection that the words "liberty and security" must be read together and that they refer to physical liberty and to freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention or a threat thereof (cf. No. 5573/72, Dec. 16.7.76, D.R. 7 p. 8, Arrowsmith v. the United Kingdom, Comm. Report 12.10.78, D.R. 19 p. 5 and No. 8334/78, Dec. 7.5.81, D.R. 24 p. 103).
• EKMR, 13.12.1976 - 7467/76

  X. v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  This general rule is, however, subject to variation in certain circumstances, such as a close relationship with an applicant in cases where the applicant may be said himself to have suffered injury as a result of the contested actions and where the direct victim is unable to bring a complaint himself (cf. No. 7467/76, Dec. 13.12.76, D.R. 8 p. 220).
• EKMR, 16.07.1976 - 5573/72

  A., B., C., D., E., F., G., H. et I. c. REPUBLIQUE FEDERALE D'ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 10.07.1986 - 10871/84

  The Commission recalls in this connection that the words "liberty and security" must be read together and that they refer to physical liberty and to freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention or a threat thereof (cf. No. 5573/72, Dec. 16.7.76, D.R. 7 p. 8, Arrowsmith v. the United Kingdom, Comm. Report 12.10.78, D.R. 19 p. 5 and No. 8334/78, Dec. 7.5.81, D.R. 24 p. 103).

• EKMR, 14.07.1987 - 10594/83

  MUNRO c. ROYAUME-UNI

  On 7 March 1985 the Commission resumed its examination of the admissibility of the application which it again decided to adjourn pending the receipt of the parties' observations in Application No. 10871/84 (Dec. 10.7.86 unpublished).

  On 11 October 1986 the Commission decided to cancel the hearing which it had proposed to hold on 12 November 1986 in the light of its decision on the admissibility of Application No. 10871/84.

  (c) The respondent Government's comments on admissibility in the light of the Commission's decision in Application No. 10871/84 (Dec. 10.7.86 unpublished).

  The respondent Government submit that in Application No. 10871/84, the Commission was concerned with precisely the same issue under Article 6 para.

  (c) The applicant's comments on admissibility in the light of the Commission's decision in Application No. 10871/84 (Dec. 10.7.86 unpublished).

  The Commission in its decision on the admissibility of Application No. 10871/84 refers to the fact that the Court in the Airey case recognised that the means by which a State ensures effective access to civil courts is within its margin of appreciation (paragraph 26).

  (iii) The present application compared with Application No. 10871/84.

  1 in Application No. 10871/84 seems to have been that, as a matter of fact, that case could be distinguished from the Airey case because that applicant was not denied effective access to the court in the same way as Mrs.

  This argument appears to have been accepted by the Commission in its decision in Application No. 10871/84.

  Airey and is very different from Application No. 10871/84.

  Unlike the applicant in Application No. 10871/84, the present applicant has received no benefit whatever from the availability under United Kingdom law of a cause of action in defamation.

  The Commission recalls its recent decision on the admissibility of Application No. 10871/84 (Dec. 10.7.86 unpublished) in which the lack of legal aid in defamation proceedings was also at issue.

• EGMR, 16.12.2008 - 23510/02

  VITRENKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  Furthermore, the Court bears in mind the positive obligation on the State to ensure that persons subjected to defamation have a reasonable opportunity to exercise their right to reply by submitting a response to defamatory information in the same manner as it was disseminated (see, mutatis mutandis, Peck v. the United Kingdom, no. 44647/98, § 90, ECHR 2003-I; Winer v. the United Kingdom, no. 10871/84, Commission decision of 10 July 1986, DR 48, p. 154; and Earl Spencer and Countess Spencer v. the United Kingdom, nos. 28851/95 and 28852/95, Commission decision of 16 January 1998, DR 25, p.56).
• EGMR, 21.10.2004 - 71225/01

  K. c. LETTONIE

  La Cour constate d'emblée que la situation dont se plaint la requérante relève du droit au respect de la vie privée, qui recouvre le droit à la protection de l'honneur et de la réputation (voir Radio France et autres c. France, no 53984/00, § 31, CEDH 2004-II, ainsi que Winer c. Royaume-Uni, no 10871/84, décision de la Commission du 10 juillet 1986, Décisions et rapports (DR) 48, p. 154 ; Waring et Canto e Castro c. Portugal, no 28614/95, décision de la Commission du 9 avril 1996, et Sindicato dos Pilotos de Aviação Civil et autres c. Portugal (déc.), no 38176/02, 29 janvier 2004).

 
• EKMR, 26.06.1996 - 27435/95

  THAW v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  The Commission recalls that Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention does not guarantee a right to legal aid in civil proceedings and that the means by which the State ensures effective access to civil courts is therefore within its margin of appreciation (Eur. Court H.R. Airey v. Ireland judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32, p. 15, para. 26, No. 10871/84, Dec. 10.7.86, D.R. 48 p. 154).
• EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 49876/07

  RODIVILOV v. UKRAINE

  Furthermore, the Court bears in mind the positive obligation on the State to ensure that persons subjected to alleged defamation have a reasonable opportunity to exercise their right to reply by submitting a response to the defamatory information in the same medium as disseminated (see, mutatis mutandis, Peck v. the United Kingdom, no. 44647/98, § 90, ECHR 2003-I; Winer v. the United Kingdom, no. 10871/84, Commission decision of 10 July 1986, DR 48, p. 154; and Earl Spencer and Countess Spencer v. the United Kingdom, nos. 28851/95 and 28852/95, Commission decision of 16 January 1998, DR 25, p. 56).
• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27554/95

  COXHEAD v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Moreover, even where legal aid may be available for certain types of civil action, it is reasonable to impose conditions on its availability involving, inter alia, the financial situation of the litigant or the prospects of success of the proceedings (No. 8158/78, Dec. 10.7.80, D.R. 21, p. 95; No. 10871/84, Dec. 10.7.86, D.R. 48, p. 154; No. 10594/83, Dec. 14.7.87, D.R. 52, p. 158).
• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27723/95

  DOUGLAS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Moreover, even where legal aid may be available for certain types of civil action, it is reasonable to impose conditions on its availability involving, inter alia, the financial situation of the litigant or the prospects of success of the proceedings (No. 8158/78, Dec. 10.7.80, D.R. 21, p. 95; No. 10871/84, Dec. 10.7.86, D.R. 48, p. 154; No. 10594/83, Dec. 14.7.87, D.R. 52, p. 158).
• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 27821/95

  SINCLAIR v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Moreover, even where legal aid may be available for certain types of civil action, it is reasonable to impose conditions on its availability involving, inter alia, the financial situation of the litigant or the prospects of success of the proceedings (No. 8158/78, Dec. 10.7.80, D.R. 21, p. 95; No. 10871/84, Dec. 10.7.86, D.R. 48, p. 154; No. 10594/83, Dec. 14.7.87, D.R. 52, p. 158).
• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 28156/95

  SEARLE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Moreover, even where legal aid may be available for certain types of civil action, it is reasonable to impose conditions on its availability involving, inter alia, the financial situation of the litigant or the prospects of success of the proceedings (No. 8158/78, Dec. 10.7.80, D.R. 21, p. 95; No. 10871/84, Dec. 10.7.86, D.R. 48, p. 154; No. 10594/83, Dec. 14.7.87, D.R. 52, p. 158).
• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 28639/95

  WOODLEY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Moreover, even where legal aid may be available for certain types of civil action, it is reasonable to impose conditions on its availability involving, inter alia, the financial situation of the litigant or the prospects of success of the proceedings (No. 8158/78, Dec. 10.7.80, D.R. 21, p. 95; No. 10871/84, Dec. 10.7.86, D.R. 48, p. 154; No. 10594/83, Dec. 14.7.87, D.R. 52, p. 158).
• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 28641/95

  TAYLOR v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 06.04.1995 - 25505/94

  CHRISTOFOROU v. CYPRUS
• EKMR, 09.11.1987 - 11790/85

  HARRISON v. UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 20.05.1997 - 31106/96

  MARANGOS v. CYPRUS
• EKMR, 05.05.1993 - 21325/93

  H.S. AND D.M. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM