Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NAMIK YÜKSEL v. TÜRKIYE

  No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  YÜKSEL v. TURKEY

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 14 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Zitiert selbst (13)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 14.12.2023 - 59433/18

  EGMR zu den Rechten von Beamten: Lehrer dürften nicht streiken

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  59433/18 and 3 others, § 101, 14 December 2023).
• EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02

  Opuz ./. Türkei

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  The Court will thus give heed to the evolution of norms and principles in international law through other developments (see, mutatis mutandis, Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, § 164, ECHR 2009), such as the relevant international material regarding the importance for children of maintaining a bond with their incarcerated parents (see paragraph 23 above).
• EGMR, 19.01.2012 - 39472/07

  [FRE]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  In cases where the family is in detention, while mutual enjoyment by parent and child of each other's company constitutes a fundamental element of family life, it cannot be inferred from this that the sole fact that the family unit is maintained necessarily guarantees respect for the right to a family life (see Popov v. France, nos. 39472/07 and 39474/07, § 134, 19 January 2012).

• EGMR, 17.10.2023 - 55351/17

  LUCA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  In particular, a parent cannot be entitled under Article 8 to have such measures taken as would harm the child's health and development (Luca v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 55351/17, § 85, 17 October 2023).
• EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 37685/10

  RADOMILJA AND OTHERS v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  Rn. 25 By virtue of the jura novit curia principle, the Court is not bound by the legal grounds adduced by the applicant under the Convention and its Protocols, and has the power to decide on the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of a complaint by examining it under Articles or provisions of the Convention that are different from those relied upon by the applicant (see Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, § 126, 20 March 2018).
• EGMR, 30.06.2015 - 41418/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  Rn. 46 The relevant general principles have been summarised in Strand Lobben and Others v. Norway ([GC], no. 37283/13, §§ 202-04, 10 September 2019), Khoroshenko v. Russia ([GC], no. 41418/04, §§ 116-26, ECHR 2015 and the cases cited therein), Deltuva v. Lithuania, no. 38144/20, §§ 42 and 44, 21 March 2023, and Subaşı and Others v. Türkiye (nos. 3468/20 and 18 others, §§ 84 and 88-89, 6 December 2022).
• EGMR, 10.01.2017 - 32407/13

  NOWAKOWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  Rn. 36 With regard to the Government's objection as to the applicant's victim status, the Court considers that this objection is closely linked to the merits of the complaint under Article 8 (see Kacper Nowakowski v. Poland, no. 32407/13, § 55, 10 January 2017) and that it is not necessary to examine it for the reasons explained below (see paragraphs 51-63 below; see also, for the same approach, Giorgioni v. Italy, no. 43299/12, § 51, 15 September 2016).
• EGMR, 06.12.2022 - 3468/20

  SUBASI c. TURQUIE et 29 autres affaires

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  Rn. 46 The relevant general principles have been summarised in Strand Lobben and Others v. Norway ([GC], no. 37283/13, §§ 202-04, 10 September 2019), Khoroshenko v. Russia ([GC], no. 41418/04, §§ 116-26, ECHR 2015 and the cases cited therein), Deltuva v. Lithuania, no. 38144/20, §§ 42 and 44, 21 March 2023, and Subaşı and Others v. Türkiye (nos. 3468/20 and 18 others, §§ 84 and 88-89, 6 December 2022).
• EGMR, 12.07.2016 - 11059/12

  ALIYEV AND GADZHIYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  Rn. 48 In so far as the family life of a child is concerned, the Court reiterates that there is a broad consensus, including in international law, in support of the idea that in all decisions concerning children, their best interests are of paramount importance and must come before all other considerations (see, among other authorities, Gnahoré v. France, no. 40031/98, § 59, ECHR 2000-IX; Aliyev and Gadzhiyeva v. Russia, no. 11059/12, § 77, 12 July 2016; Strand Lobben and Others, cited above, § 204; and Abdi Ibrahim v. Norway [GC], no. 15379/16, § 145, 10 December 2021).
• EGMR, 15.09.2016 - 43299/12

  GIORGIONI c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2024 - 28791/10

  Rn. 36 With regard to the Government's objection as to the applicant's victim status, the Court considers that this objection is closely linked to the merits of the complaint under Article 8 (see Kacper Nowakowski v. Poland, no. 32407/13, § 55, 10 January 2017) and that it is not necessary to examine it for the reasons explained below (see paragraphs 51-63 below; see also, for the same approach, Giorgioni v. Italy, no. 43299/12, § 51, 15 September 2016).
• EGMR, 20.10.2020 - 41736/18

  SUUR v. ESTONIA
• EGMR, 21.03.2023 - 38144/20

  DELTUVA v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 06.06.2023 - 10207/21

  DEMIRTAS c. TURQUIE et 1 autre affaire

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 14.01.2025 - 60811/15

  KUNSHUGAROV v. TURKEY and 1 other application

  Rn. 93 The Court notes that it has already examined similar objections raised by the Government in previous cases and rejected them (see, Mehmet Çiftci v. Turkey, no. 53208/19, § 26, 16 November 2021, Demirtaş and Yüksekdağ Şenoğlu v. Türkiye, nos. 10207/21 and 10209/21, §§ 77-78, 6 June 2023, Kural v. Türkiye, no. 84388/17, § 54, 19 March 2024, and Namık Yüksel v. Türkiye, no. 28791/10, § 35, 27 August 2024).
• EGMR, 21.01.2025 - 74601/14

  GENÇ v. TURKEY and 1 other application

  Rn. 56 The Court notes that it has already examined similar objections raised by the Government in previous cases and rejected them (see, Mehmet Çiftci v. Turkey, no. 53208/19, § 26, 16 November 2021, Demirtaş and Yüksekdağ Şenoğlu v. Türkiye, nos. 10207/21 and 10209/21, §§ 77-78, 6 June 2023, Kural v. Türkiye, no. 84388/17, § 54, 19 March 2024, and Namık Yüksel v. Türkiye, no. 28791/10, § 35, 27 August 2024).
• EGMR, 17.06.2025 - 3485/21

  ANDRONACHE v. ROMANIA

  This is the principle referred to in all international studies of the importance for children of maintaining a bond with their incarcerated parents (see the Recommendation CM/Rec(2018)5 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, cited in paragraph 33 above, and also, mutatis mutandis, Namık Yüksel v. Türkiye, no. 28791/10, § 55, 27 August 2024).

• EGMR, 21.01.2025 - 19085/18

  ÇAGIL v. TURKEY

  Rn. 35 The Court notes that it has already examined similar objection raised by the Government in previous cases and rejected them (see, Mehmet Çiftci v. Turkey, no. 53208/19, § 26, 16 November 2021, Demirtaş and Yüksekdağ Şenoğlu v. Türkiye, nos. 10207/21 and 10209/21, §§ 77-78, 6 June 2023, Kural v. Türkiye, no. 84388/17, § 54, 19 March 2024, and Namık Yüksel v. Türkiye, no. 28791/10, § 35, 27 August 2024).
• EGMR, 03.12.2024 - 18980/20

  ÖZDEMIR c. TÜRKIYE

  The Court sees no reason to depart from those findings in the present case and dismisses the Government's objection (see Namık Yüksel v. Türkiye, no. 28791/10, § 35, 27 August 2024).
• EGMR, 24.06.2025 - 42588/20

  MOHÎRÈšA c. ROUMANIE

  Toutefois, la Cour n'est pas tenue par les moyens de droit avancés par un requérant (Radomilja et autres c. Croatie [GC], nos 37685/10 et 22768/12, § 126, 20 mars 2018) et estime qu'il convient d'examiner le grief que le requérant tire des difficultés alléguées de maintenir le contact avec sa famille sur le terrain de l'article 8 de la Convention (voir, en ce sens, Namık Yüksel c. Türkiye, no 28791/10, §§ 24-25, 27 août 2024).