Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GANBAROVA AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  Violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 - Freedom of movement-general (Article 2 para. 2 of Protocol No. 4 - Freedom to leave a country);Violation of Article 13+P4-2-2 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 - ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  GANBAROVA v. AZERBAIJAN and 3 other applications

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 18, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2 Abs. 2 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Zitiert selbst (3)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

  CENTER OF LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CAMPEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.09.2023 - 1158/17

  Rn. 19 As concerns the remaining complaints (see paragraph 7 above), having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties, and its findings above (see paragraphs 12 and 15 above), the Court considers that it has dealt with the main legal questions raised by the case and that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of these complaints (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no.47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014).
• KAGH, 07.06.2013 - M 22/12

  Zustimmung der MAV beim Einsatz von Dienstleistungskräften (Anästhesieteam) - zum …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.09.2023 - 1158/17

  22/12/2016.
• EGMR, 13.12.2018 - 66650/13

  MURSALIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN and 10 other applications

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.09.2023 - 1158/17

  Rn. 10 The Court refers to the general principles established in its case-law and set out in Mursaliyev and Others v. Azerbaijan (nos. 66650/13 and 10 others, §§ 29-31, 13 December 2018), which are equally pertinent to the present case.

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• OLG Stuttgart, 27.03.2019 - 20 Kap 4/17

  Porsche/VW: Weitere KapMuG-Vorlage für unzulässig erklärt

  Drei weitere Aussetzungsbeschlüsse vom 21.2.2018 hat das Landgericht Braunschweig (Az. 5 O 747/17, 5 O 255/17, 5 O 1158/17) mitgeteilt; diese Verfahren wurden im Hinblick auf das Braunschweiger Musterverfahren ausgesetzt, soweit gegen die Musterbeklagte zu 1 Ansprüche in Bezug auf Transaktionen in VW-Aktien gelten gemacht werden, und im Hinblick auf den Vorlagebeschluss des Landgerichts Stuttgart vom 6.12.2017, 22 AR 2/17 Kap, soweit beide Musterbeklagten wegen Transaktionen in PSE-Vorzugsaktien in Anspruch genommen werden (…siehe insoweit VB Rn. 4 und 189 zur Fallgruppe B).
• OLG Stuttgart, 27.03.2019 - 20 Kap 3/17

  Porsche/VW: Weiterer Vorlagebeschluss zu neuem KapMuG-Verfahren abgelehnt

  Rn. 29 Drei Aussetzungsbeschlüsse vom 21.2.2018 hat zunächst das Landgericht Braunschweig (Az. 5 O 747/17, 5 O 255/17, 5 O 1158/17) mitgeteilt; diese Verfahren wurden im Hinblick auf das Braunschweiger Musterverfahren ausgesetzt, soweit gegen die Musterbeklagte zu 1 Ansprüche in Bezug auf Transaktionen in VW-Aktien gelten gemacht werden, und im Hinblick auf den Vorlagebeschluss des Landgerichts Stuttgart vom 6.12.2017, 22 AR 2/17 Kap, soweit beide Musterbeklagten wegen Transaktionen in PSE-Vorzugsaktien in Anspruch genommen werden.
• LG Bonn, 06.06.2019 - 21 KLs 28/18
  664 Js 1158/17.

• EGMR, 27.01.2026 - 71556/16

  ISMAYILOVA v. AZERBAIJAN and 1 other application

  44031/17 and 41494/20, concerning the imposition of the travel ban, which are pending before the Court.
• EGMR, 07.04.2026 - 44031/17

  ISMAYILOVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  Rn. 27 As concerns the applicant's complaints under Articles 8, 10, 13 and 18 of the Convention (see paragraph 12 above), having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties, and its findings above (see paragraph 26), as well as the Court's findings in Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan (no. 2) (no. 30778/15, §§ 105-20, 27 February 2020), the Court considers that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of the remaining complaints (compare Aliyev, cited above, § 25, and Ganbarova and Others v. Azerbaijan [Committee], nos. 1158/17 and 2 others, § 19, 21 September 2023).
• EGMR, 11.07.2024 - 22365/18

  ALIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Rn. 25 As concerns the applicant's complaints under Articles 8, 10, 13 and 18 of the Convention (see paragraph 9 above), having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties, and its findings above (see paragraph 24 above), the Court considers that it has dealt with the main legal questions raised by the case and that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of the remaining complaints (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014; compare also Ganbarova and Others v. Azerbaijan [Committee], nos. 1158/17 and 2 others, § 19, 21 September 2023).
• EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 50612/18

  MAHMUDOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Rn. 22 Having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties and its findings above (see paragraphs 18 and 21 above), the Court considers that it has dealt with the main legal questions raised by the case and that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of the applicant's complaint under Article 10 of the Convention (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014, and Ganbarova and Others v. Azerbaijan [Committee], nos. 1158/17 and 2 others, § 19, 21 September 2023).