Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GEORGIEVA AND MUKAREVA v. BULGARIA

  Violation of P1-1 (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Zitiert selbst (10)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  VELIKOVI AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice have been summarised in the Court's judgments in the cases of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, 15 March 2007) and Tsonkovi v. Bulgaria (no. 27213/04, §§ 14-15, 2 July 2009).

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, § 10, 24 April 2008).

• EGMR, 24.04.2008 - 48380/99

  TODOROVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice have been summarised in the Court's judgments in the cases of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, 15 March 2007) and Tsonkovi v. Bulgaria (no. 27213/04, §§ 14-15, 2 July 2009).

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, § 10, 24 April 2008).

• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 51362/99

  ENEVA AND DOBREV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice have been summarised in the Court's judgments in the cases of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, 15 March 2007) and Tsonkovi v. Bulgaria (no. 27213/04, §§ 14-15, 2 July 2009).

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, § 10, 24 April 2008).

• EGMR, 02.07.2009 - 27636/04

  PANAYOTOVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  In view thereof, and also noting that Ms Margaritova-Vuchkova has represented other applicants in identical cases (see, for example Panayotova v. Bulgaria, no. 27636/04, 2 July 2009, and Tsonkovi, cited above), the Court awards EUR 2, 000 under this head, EUR 410 of which to be paid to the applicants and the remainder, EUR 1, 590, directly into the bank account of Ms Margaritova-Vuchkova.
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 194/02

  NIKOLOVI v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice have been summarised in the Court's judgments in the cases of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, 15 March 2007) and Tsonkovi v. Bulgaria (no. 27213/04, §§ 14-15, 2 July 2009).
• EGMR, 01.02.2017 - 43278/98

  VELIKOVI ET AUTRES ET 5 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice have been summarised in the Court's judgments in the cases of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, 15 March 2007) and Tsonkovi v. Bulgaria (no. 27213/04, §§ 14-15, 2 July 2009).
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 53367/99

  STOYANOVA AND IVANOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice have been summarised in the Court's judgments in the cases of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, 15 March 2007) and Tsonkovi v. Bulgaria (no. 27213/04, §§ 14-15, 2 July 2009).
• EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 10913/04

  GEORGIEVI v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  61330/00, 66840/01 and 69155/01, 18 September 2007, Kayriakovi v. Bulgaria, no. 30945/04, § 24-29, 7 January 2010, and Georgievi v. Bulgaria, no. 10913/04, §§ 26-27, 7 January 2010).
• EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 24186/04

  BACHVAROVI v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  This deficiency is clearly attributable to authorities, not the applicants (see Yurukova and Samundzhi v. Bulgaria, no. 19162/03, § 24, 2 July 2009, and Bachvarovi v. Bulgaria, no. 24186/04, § 24, 7 January 2010).
• EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 61330/00

  SHOILEKOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  61330/00, 66840/01 and 69155/01, 18 September 2007, Kayriakovi v. Bulgaria, no. 30945/04, § 24-29, 7 January 2010, and Georgievi v. Bulgaria, no. 10913/04, §§ 26-27, 7 January 2010).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 01.02.2017 - 43278/98

  VELIKOVI ET AUTRES ET 5 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA BULGARIE

  3413/05.
• EGMR, 21.07.2016 - 50506/09

  TOMOV AND NIKOLOVA v. BULGARIA

  The Court has examined complaints concerning the effect of restitution on third parties in a number of cases against Bulgaria, most notably Velikovi and Others, cited above (see also, for example, Dimitar and Anka Dimitrovi v. Bulgaria, no. 56753/00, 12 February 2009; Vladimirova and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 42617/02, 26 February 2009; Peshevi v. Bulgaria, no. 29722/04, 2 July 2009; Madzharov v. Bulgaria, no. 40149/05, 2 September 2010; and Georgieva and Mukareva v. Bulgaria, no. 3413/05, 2 September 2010).
• EGMR, 30.03.2017 - 65688/12

  STEFANOVI v. BULGARIA

  The Court has already found that the responsibility for such an error lay with the authorities and that the applicants bore no fault in this respect (see Georgieva and Mukareva v. Bulgaria, no. 3413/05, § 31, 2 September 2010).
• EGMR, 25.08.2015 - 11186/12

  PETROVI v. BULGARIA

  The Court notes that the application concerns the same legislation and issues as Velikovi and Others (cited above) and the follow-up cases (see, for example, Peshevi v. Bulgaria, no. 29722/04, 2 July 2009; Georgieva and Mukareva v. Bulgaria, no. 3413/05, 2 September 2010; Madzharov v. Bulgaria, no. 40149/05, 2 September 2010; Tonov and Others v. Bulgaria [Committee], no. 48704/07, 30 October 2012).
• EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 48704/07

  TONOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  In the cases of Tsonkovi (cited above, §§ 24-27) and Georgieva and Mukareva v. Bulgaria (no. 3413/05, §§ 38-40, 2 September 2010), where, similarly to the present case, the actions under section 7 of the Restitution Law had been brought after the expiry of the initial time-limit in 1993 and its renewal in 1997, the Court found that the interference with the applicants" property rights represented a departure from the transitional nature of the restitution legislation and from the principle of legal certainty and could not be seen as falling within the scope of the legitimate aims that the restitution legislation pursued in principle.