Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SCHEMBRI AND OTHERS AND 5 OTHER CASES AGAINST MALTA

  Information given by the government concerning measures taken to prevent new violations. Payment of the sums provided for in the judgment (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SCHEMBRI ET AUTRES ET 5 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE MALTE

  Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises permettant d'éviter de nouvelles violations. Versement des sommes prévues dans l'arrêt (französisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 10.11.2009 - 42583/06
• EGMR, 28.09.2010 - 42583/06
• EGMR, 06.09.2016 - 42583/06, 2226/10, 2243/10, 57862/09, 14796/11, 28177/12
• EGMR - 42583/06

Wird zitiert von ... (8)

• EGMR, 06.11.2014 - 28177/12

  AZZOPARDI v. MALTA

  The Court reiterates that an applicant is deprived of his or her status as a victim if the national authorities have acknowledged, either expressly or in substance, and then afforded appropriate and sufficient redress for a breach of the Convention (see, for example, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 178-193, ECHR 2006-V; Gera de Petri Testaferrata Bonici Ghaxaq v. Malta, no. 26771/07, § 50, 5 April 2011; and Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, no. 2226/10, § 34, 22 November 2011).

  Thus, the Government submitted that the case was different from that of Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta (no. 2226/10, just satisfaction, 9 July 2013) where the Court - referring to its principal judgment - had considered it unnecessary to wait for the outcome of the compensation proceedings.

  The Court therefore considers that the compensation in the present case should - as in other similar cases (see, for example, Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, (just satisfaction), no. 2226/10, § 20, 9 July 2013) - be based on the guidelines established in Schembri and Others v. Malta ((just satisfaction), no. 42583/06, § 18, 28 September 2010).

• EGMR, 06.07.2021 - 48719/20

  PISANI v. MALTA

  The Court's assessment 38. The Court reiterates that an applicant is deprived of his or her status as a victim if the national authorities have acknowledged, either expressly or in substance, and then afforded appropriate and sufficient redress for a breach of the Convention (see, for example, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 178-193, ECHR 2006-V; Gera de Petri Testaferrata Bonici Ghaxaq v. Malta, no. 26771/07, § 50, 5 April 2011; and Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, no. 2226/10, § 34, 22 November 2011).

  In those cases, where there was no doubt about the public interest behind the measure, the Court finding a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (because of the inadequate compensation provided by law in view of the passage of time) awarded compensation applying the guidelines established in Schembri and Others v. Malta ((just satisfaction), no. 42583/06, 28 September 2010), i.e. on the basis of the value of the land at the time of the original taking, progressively adjusted to the time of the Court's judgment, plus interest (see, for example, Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, (just satisfaction), no. 2226/10, § 20, 9 July 2013; Deguara Caruana Gatto and Others v. Malta, no. 14796/11, § 98, 9 July 2013; Azzopardi v. Malta, no. 28177/12, §§ 66 and 69, 6 November 2014; and Scerri v. Malta, no. 36318/18, §§ 53-54, 7 July 2020).

• EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 10613/16

  SHARXHI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  Therefore, the Court considers that, in such cases, owners should not be expected to incur the expense and burden of instituting proceedings to ensure the authorities" fulfilment of their legal obligation (see, mutatis mutandis, Apostol v. Georgia, no. 40765/02, §§ 64-65, ECHR 2006-XI, and Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, no. 2226/10, § 65, 22 November 2011, in relation to enforcement proceedings).

 
• EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 37474/21

  CHEMEL AND TABONE v. MALTA

  The Court reiterates that an applicant is deprived of his or her status as a victim if the national authorities have acknowledged, either expressly or in substance, and then afforded appropriate and sufficient redress for a breach of the Convention (see, for example, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 178-193, ECHR 2006-V; Gera de Petri Testaferrata Bonici Ghaxaq v. Malta, no. 26771/07, § 50, 5 April 2011; and Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, no. 2226/10, § 34, 22 November 2011).
• EGMR, 09.06.2022 - 22008/20

  MARIA AZZOPARDI v. MALTA

  Furthermore, the Court has considered that a subsequent privatisation of the expropriated property does not render the measure devoid of public interest (see, for example, Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, no. 2226/10, § 60, 22 November 2011).
• EGMR, 28.04.2022 - 43693/20

  SPITERI v. MALTA

  It is also true that the judicial authorities remain responsible for the conduct of the proceedings before them and ought to weigh the advantages of continued adjournments pending the outcome of other cases against the requirement of promptness (see, for example, Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, no. 2226/10, § 68, 22 November 2011).
• EGMR, 31.03.2015 - 30020/11

  VESELSKÝ c. RÉPUBLIQUE TCHÈQUE

  Dès lors, avant de formuler leurs griefs au niveau international, les requérants doivent les soulever au travers des recours internes respectant ces formalités telles qu'interprétées et appliquées par les juridictions nationales (voir, mutatis mutandis, Rosselet-Christ c. Slovaquie, no 25329/05, § 75, 26 octobre 2010; Curmi c. Malte, no 2243/10, § 30, 22 novembre 2011).
• EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 43675/16

  ZAMMIT AND VASSALLO v. MALTA

  The Court reiterates that an applicant is deprived of his or her status as a victim if the national authorities have acknowledged, either expressly or in substance, and then afforded appropriate and sufficient redress for a breach of the Convention (see, for example, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 178-193, ECHR 2006-V; Gera de Petri Testaferrata Bonici Ghaxaq v. Malta, no. 26771/07, § 50, 5 April 2011; and Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, no. 2226/10, § 34, 22 November 2011).