Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  POSTI ET RAHKO c. FINLANDE

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 14+P1 Abs. 1, Art. 14, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 2, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 13 MRK
  Exception préliminaire partiellement retenue (six mois) Exceptions préliminaires partiellement rejetées (six mois non-épuisement des voies de recours internes) Violation de l'art. 6-1 Non-violation de P1-1 Non-violation de l'art. 14+P1-1 Non-lieu à examiner ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  POSTI AND RAHKO v. FINLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 14+P1 Abs. 1, Art. 14, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 2, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 13 MRK
  Preliminary objection partially allowed (six months) Preliminary objections partially rejected (six months non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Violation of Art. 6-1 No violation of P1-1 No violation of Art. 14+P1-1 Not necessary to examine Art. 13 Pecuniary damage ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 27824/95
• EGMR, 24.09.2002 - 27824/95

Wird zitiert von ... (49)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 11.07.2002 - 28957/95

  Christine Goodwin ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.09.2002 - 27824/95

  The Court considers that the default interest should be fixed at an annual rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points (see Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 28957/95, § 124, ECHR 2002-VI).
• EGMR, 25.01.2000 - 34979/97

  WALKER v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.09.2002 - 27824/95

  It is therefore not open to the Court to set aside the application of the six-month rule solely because a Government have not made a preliminary objection based on it - or have chosen to limit their objection to a certain period, as in the present case (see, for example, Walker v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 34979/97, ECHR 2000-I).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 34369/97

  THLIMMENOS c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.09.2002 - 27824/95

  The right under Article 14 not to be discriminated against in the enjoyment of the rights guaranteed under the Convention is violated not only when States - without providing an objective and reasonable justification - treat differently persons in analogous situations but also when they fail to treat differently persons whose situations are significantly different (see Thlimmenos v. Greece [GC], no. 34369/97, §§ 40 and 44, ECHR 2000-IV).

 
• EGMR, 25.11.1993 - 14282/88

  ZANDER v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.09.2002 - 27824/95

  Finally, the right must be of a "civil" character (see, for example, Zander v. Sweden, judgment of 25 November 1993, Series A no. 279-B, p. 38, § 22).
• EGMR, 28.09.1995 - 14570/89

  PROCOLA c. LUXEMBOURG

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.09.2002 - 27824/95

  Considering the terms of those leases - which were directly related to their occupation as professional fishermen - as well as the domestic case-law preceding the 1996 and the 1998 Decrees, the Court finds it established that up to the end of 1999 the applicants could arguably claim a "civil right" to fish for salmon and sea trout in the relevant waters to an extent exceeding the limits set out in the 1996 and the 1998 Decrees (see, for instance, Procola v. Luxembourg, judgment of 28 September 1995, Series A no. 326, pp. 13-15, §§ 34-40).
• EGMR, 28.06.1978 - 6232/73

  König ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.09.2002 - 27824/95

  The term "right" must nevertheless be given an autonomous interpretation under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, for example, König v. Germany, judgment of 28 June 1978, Series A no. 27, pp. 29-30, §§ 88-89).
• EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14556/89

  PAPAMICHALOPOULOS ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.09.2002 - 27824/95

  Furthermore, the Convention is intended to safeguard rights which are "practical and effective" as opposed to "theoretical" or "illusory" (see, for instance, Papamichalopoulos and Others v. Greece, judgment of 24 June 1993, Series A no. 260-B, p. 69, § 42).

• EGMR, 09.04.2024 - 53600/20

  Verein Klimaseniorinnen Schweiz u.a. ./. Schweiz - Staatliche Maßnahmen gegen …

  Principes généraux 594. L'article 6 de la Convention ne garantit pas un droit d'accès à un tribunal ayant compétence pour invalider ou remplacer une loi émanant du pouvoir législatif (voir, par exemple, Ruiz-Mateos et autres c. Espagne, no 14324/88, décision de la Commission du 19 avril 1991, Décisions et rapports 69, p. 22, Posti et Rahko c. Finlande, no 27824/95, § 52, CEDH 2002-VII, et Project-Trade d.o.o. c. Croatie, no 1920/14, § 68, 19 novembre 2020).
• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 42525/07

  ANANYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The concept of a "continuing situation" refers to a state of affairs in which there are continuous activities by or on the part of the State which render the applicant a victim (see Posti and Rahko v. Finland, no. 27824/95, § 39, ECHR 2002-VII).
• EGMR, 19.04.2007 - 63235/00

  VILHO ESKELINEN AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

  Looking to European law generally, which provides useful guidance (see Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 28957/95, §§ 43-45, 92 and 100, ECHR 2002-VI; Posti and Rahko v. Finland, no. 27824/95, § 54, ECHR 2002-VII; and Meftah and Others v. France [GC], nos. 32911/96, 35237/97 and 34595/97, § 45, ECHR 2002-VII), the Court notes that Pellegrin sought support in the categories of activities and posts listed by the European Commission and by the Court of Justice of the European Communities in connection with the exception to the freedom of movement (see Pellegrin, cited above, § 66).

 
• EGMR, 23.01.2024 - 71555/12

  O.G. ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE

  Par suite, le fait qu'un événement ait des conséquences importantes étalées dans le temps ne signifie pas qu'il est à l'origine d'une « situation continue'(Posti et Rahko c. Finlande, no 27824/95, §§ 39-40, CEDH 2002-VII, Petkov c. Bulgarie (déc.), nos 77568/01, 178/02 et 505/02, 4 décembre 2007, et Meltex LTD c. Arménie (déc.), no 37780/02, 27 mai 2008).
• EGMR, 28.07.2005 - 33538/96

  ALATULKKILA AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

  An account of domestic law can also be found in the Court's judgment in Posti and Rahko v. Finland (no. 27824/95, §§ 18-30, 24 September 2002).

  Although Article 6 cannot guarantee a right of access to a court with power to invalidate or override a law enacted by the legislature (see, for instance, Ruiz-Mateos and Others v. Spain, application no. 14324/88, Commission decision of 19 April 1991, DR 69, p. 227; Posti and Rahko v. Finland, no. 27824/95, ECHR 2002-VII, § 52), the Court may examine the direct effect of the decisions of the Finnish-Swedish Frontier Rivers Commission which prohibited fishing under the powers bestowed on them by various decrees.

• EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 35972/05

  IACOV STANCIU v. ROMANIA

  The Court reiterates that the concept of a "continuing situation" refers to a state of affairs in which there are continuous activities by or on the part of the State which render the applicant a victim (see Posti and Rahko v. Finland, no. 27824/95, § 39, ECHR 2002-VII).
• EGMR, 21.11.2023 - 25240/20

  GYULUMYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA

  As regards the applicants' argument that the impugned constitutional amendment terminating their terms of office should have been subject to a prior constitutional review, the Court would reiterate that Article 6 does not guarantee a right of access to a court with power to invalidate or override a law enacted by the legislature (see, for instance, Posti and Rahko v. Finland, no. 27824/95, § 52, ECHR 2002-VII, and Sakskoburggotski and Chrobok v. Bulgaria, nos.
• EGMR, 07.06.2018 - 44460/16

  O'SULLIVAN McCARTHY MUSSEL DEVELOPMENT LTD v. IRELAND

  40886/06 and 51946/07, 6 October 2016; Matczynski v. Poland, no. 32794/07, 15 December 2015; Alatulkkila and Others v. Finland, no. 33538/96, 28 July 2005; and Posti and Rahko v. Finland, no. 27824/95, ECHR 2002-VII. The pursuit of this aim was not confined to the applicant company's particular circumstances, but extended to all aquaculture operators based in designated locations around the coastline.
• EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 57541/09

  VALERIY SAMOYLOV v. RUSSIA

  At the same time, the concept of a "continuing situation" refers to a state of affairs in which there are continuing activities by or on behalf of the State which render the applicant a victim (see Posti and Rahko v. Finland, no. 27824/95, § 39, ECHR 2002-VII).
• EGMR, 30.10.2003 - 41576/98

  GANCI c. ITALIE

  Dès lors, ayant conclu à la violation de l'article 6 de la Convention dans la présente affaire, la Cour estime qu'il n'y a pas lieu de rechercher s'il y a eu violation de l'article 13 (Posti et Rahko c. Finlande, no 27824/95, § 89, CEDH 2002-VII).
• EGMR, 19.07.2016 - 25057/11

  CALIN ET AUTRES c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 07.10.2021 - 49529/12

  SYRIANOS c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 07.09.2021 - 38948/10

  SAKSKOBURGGOTSKI AND CHROBOK v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 26.06.2008 - 15591/03

  SELEZNEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 78638/11

  SHLYKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.01.2013 - 52013/08

  MOSENDZ v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 11.07.2013 - 28975/05

  KHLYUSTOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 14.06.2011 - 24096/05

  VEFA HOLDING SH.P.K. AND ALIMUCAJ v. ALBANIA
• EGMR, 05.12.2006 - 39559/02

  STARK AND OTHERS v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 17047/07

  SULTAN c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 30.03.2017 - 16287/13

  GRAMMOSENIS AND OTHERS v. GREECE
• EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 41064/05

  HADZHIGEORGIEVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 43710/07

  FETISOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 34393/03

  PITALEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 14.10.2008 - 6817/02

  IORDACHE c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 03.06.2008 - 1477/02

  S.C. PILOT SERVICE S.A. CONSTANTA c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 01.03.2016 - 31127/11

  J.J. AND S.U. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 30.08.2011 - 44205/02

  AKTAS ELEKTRIK TIC. A.S. c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 29.03.2011 - 31242/05

  VLADIMIR SOKOLOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 29.03.2011 - 18240/03

  UZAN ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 12.07.2007 - 28333/02

  SC RUXANDRA TRADING SRL c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 05.07.2005 - 6870/03

  VITIELLO c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 05.03.2019 - 8340/07

  ANTER c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 07.11.2017 - 60867/08

  SHANIDZE v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 28.05.2013 - 13340/09

  VILLANI c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 27.05.2008 - 37780/02

  MELTEX LTD v. ARMENIA
• EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 41266/04

  DE NIGRIS ET 2 AUTRES (N°2) c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 74644/01

  DONADZE c. GEORGIE
• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 13677/03

  KOMANICKY v. SLOVAKIA
• EGMR, 30.04.2019 - 17021/12

  CARPEN c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 21.09.2017 - 30743/09

  KUPARADZE v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 04.03.2014 - 19696/13

  ZAKÁR v. HUNGARY
• EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 13579/09

  RAZVYAZKIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 05.10.2010 - 33197/09

  ALEXANDRE c. PORTUGAL
• EGMR, 02.12.2008 - 40169/05

  GUDJONSSON v. ICELAND
• EGMR, 28.10.2003 - 55524/00

  STONE COURT SHIPPING COMPANY, S.A. c. ESPAGNE
• EGMR, 20.04.2017 - 10244/14

  CELA AND OTHERS v. GREECE
• EGMR, 27.11.2018 - 4588/16

  HERMAN v. HUNGARY
• EGMR, 14.05.2013 - 66925/12

  HÁLÓZATI GYÓGYSZERTÁRAK SZÖVETSÉGE AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY