Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ARTASHES ANTONYAN v. ARMENIA

  Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ANTONYAN v. ARMENIA

  Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Zitiert selbst (2)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 02.12.2011 - 24768/06

  PERDIGAO CONTRE LE PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.10.2020 - 24313/10

  However, this provision must be construed in the light of the general principle set out in the first sentence of the first paragraph (see, among other authorities, Perdigão v. Portugal [GC], no. 24768/06, § 57, 16 November 2010; Ünsped Paket Servisi SaN.
• EGMR, 09.10.2018 - 35943/15

  GYRLYAN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.10.2020 - 24313/10

  v. Bulgaria, no. 3503/08, § 36, 13 October 2015; and Gyrlyan v. Russia, no. 35943/15, § 21, 9 October 2018).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 16.10.2025 - 18049/18

  MSL, TOV v. UKRAINE

  Accordingly, the Court finds that the applicant company was denied a reasonable opportunity to effectively challenge the measures in question (see Artashes Antonyan v. Armenia, no. 24313/10, § 43, 22 October 2020, and Project-Trade d.o.o. v. Croatia, no. 1920/14, § 85, 19 November 2020).
• EGMR, 13.04.2023 - 30666/13

  LAPTYEV v. UKRAINE

  In those circumstances, and in the absence of any examples on the part of the Government of domestic judicial practice in support of the Court of Appeal's interpretation of the moment when an offence was considered to have been committed, the Court has serious doubts that the application of the above provisions, in the light of the applicant's submission suggesting that his punishment had indeed been time-barred, was sufficiently foreseeable (see and compare, Artashes Antonyan v. Armenia, no. 24313/10, §§ 40-44, 22 October 2020).