Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PATEL v. UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 12, Art. 14+8, Art. 14 MRK
  inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EKMR, 06.07.1982 - 9285/81

  X., Y. et Z. c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 14.12.1988 - 14069/88

  The present case raises an issue under Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, for, whilst the Convention does not guarantee a right, as such, to enter or remain in a particular country, the Commission has constantly held that the exclusion of a person from a country where his close relatives reside may raise an issue under this provision (e.g. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28 p. 160 and No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29 p. 205).

  1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention..." (No. 8244/78, Singh, Uppal et al v. the United Kingdom, Dec. 2.5.79, D.R. 17 p. 149; No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29 p. 211).

• EKMR, 19.05.1977 - 7816/77

  X. et Y. c. REPUBLIQUE FEDERALE D'ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 14.12.1988 - 14069/88

  The present case raises an issue under Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, for, whilst the Convention does not guarantee a right, as such, to enter or remain in a particular country, the Commission has constantly held that the exclusion of a person from a country where his close relatives reside may raise an issue under this provision (e.g. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28 p. 160 and No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29 p. 205).
• EKMR, 06.03.1982 - 9088/80

  X. c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 14.12.1988 - 14069/88

  The present case raises an issue under Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, for, whilst the Convention does not guarantee a right, as such, to enter or remain in a particular country, the Commission has constantly held that the exclusion of a person from a country where his close relatives reside may raise an issue under this provision (e.g. No. 7816/77, Dec. 19.5.77, D.R. 9 p. 219; No. 9088/80, Dec. 6.3.82, D.R. 28 p. 160 and No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29 p. 205).
• EKMR, 02.05.1979 - 8244/78

  SINGH AND UPPAL v. UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 14.12.1988 - 14069/88

  1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention..." (No. 8244/78, Singh, Uppal et al v. the United Kingdom, Dec. 2.5.79, D.R. 17 p. 149; No. 9285/81, Dec. 6.7.82, D.R. 29 p. 211).

• EGMR, 15.05.2003 - 76878/01

  GRIBENKO contre la LETTONIE

  La Cour estime que la même conclusion s'impose au regard de l'article 12 de la Convention (voir Patel c. Royaume-Uni, no 14069/88, décision de la Commission du 14 décembre 1988, et S.V. c. Royaume-Uni, no 19788/92, décision de la Commission du 6 juillet 1992, non publiées, ainsi que, mutatis mutandis, Schober c. Autriche (déc.), no 34891/97, 9 novembre 1999, non publiée).
• EKMR, 16.01.1996 - 25050/94

  YAVUZ v. AUSTRIA

  Furthermore, for the same reasons given above in respect of Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, the Commission finds that Article 12 of the Convention also does not impose a general obligation upon Contracting States to respect a married couple's choice of the place where they wish to found a family or to accept non-national spouses for settlement to facilitate that choice (No. 14069/88, Dec. 14.12.88, unpublished; No. 19788/92, Dec. 9.2.92, unpublished).
• EKMR, 16.01.1996 - 27646/95

  ÖZDEMIR v. AUSTRIA

  Furthermore, the Commission finds that Article 12 (Art. 12) of the Convention does not impose a general obligation upon Contracting States to respect a married couple's choice of the place where they wish to found a family or to accept non-national spouses for settlement to facilitate that choice (No. 14069/88, Dec. 14.12.88, unpublished; No. 19788/92, Dec. 9.2.92, unpublished).