Weitere Entscheidung unten: LG Frankfurt/Main, 14.06.2011

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10, 34524/09, 37778/09, 47807/09, 54417/09, 345/10, 16550/10, 21183/10, 23340/10, 28543/10, 30408/10, 31177/10, 31212/10, 31271/10, 42339/10, 50607/10, 58144/10, 59547/10, 61580/10, 61643/10, 63282/10, 65111/10, 67701/10, 67816/10, 70171/10, 72202/1   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2017,20452
EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10, 34524/09, 37778/09, 47807/09, 54417/09, 345/10, 16550/10, 21183/10, 23340/10, 28543/10, 30408/10, 31177/10, 31212/10, 31271/10, 42339/10, 50607/10, 58144/10, 59547/10, 61580/10, 61643/10, 63282/10, 65111/10, 67701/10, 67816/10, 70171/10, 72202/1 (https://dejure.org/2017,20452)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 20.06.2017 - 53491/10, 34524/09, 37778/09, 47807/09, 54417/09, 345/10, 16550/10, 21183/10, 23340/10, 28543/10, 30408/10, 31177/10, 31212/10, 31271/10, 42339/10, 50607/10, 58144/10, 59547/10, 61580/10, 61643/10, 63282/10, 65111/10, 67701/10, 67816/10, 70171/10, 72202/1 (https://dejure.org/2017,20452)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 20. Juni 2017 - 53491/10, 34524/09, 37778/09, 47807/09, 54417/09, 345/10, 16550/10, 21183/10, 23340/10, 28543/10, 30408/10, 31177/10, 31212/10, 31271/10, 42339/10, 50607/10, 58144/10, 59547/10, 61580/10, 61643/10, 63282/10, 65111/10, 67701/10, 67816/10, 70171/10, 72202/1 (https://dejure.org/2017,20452)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,20452) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (47)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

  • EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 26307/95

    Entscheidung der Großen Kammer über die an sie nach Art. 43 Europäische …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10
    To this end, the Court has examined the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Sp. z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03, 18 September 2007; Facondis v. Cyprus, no. 9095/08, 27 May 2010; and Messana v. Italy, no. 26128/04, § 23, 9 February 2017).
  • EGMR, 27.03.2019 - 26128/04

    MESSANA AGAINST ITALY AND 4 OTHER CASES

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10
    To this end, the Court has examined the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Sp. z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03, 18 September 2007; Facondis v. Cyprus, no. 9095/08, 27 May 2010; and Messana v. Italy, no. 26128/04, § 23, 9 February 2017).
  • EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 28953/03

    SULWINSKA v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10
    To this end, the Court has examined the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Sp. z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03, 18 September 2007; Facondis v. Cyprus, no. 9095/08, 27 May 2010; and Messana v. Italy, no. 26128/04, § 23, 9 February 2017).
     
  • EGMR, 18.10.2016 - 65020/13

    ANASTASOV AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10
    60041/08 and 60054/08, § 111, ECHR 2010 (extracts); Kuric and Others v. Slovenia [GC], no. 26828/06, § 413, ECHR 2012 (extracts); Kuric and Others v. Slovenia (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 26828/06, § 138 ECHR 2014; Anastasov and Others v. Slovenia (dec.) no. 65020/13, 18 October 2016, § 90).
  • EGMR, 08.03.2011 - 3485/02

    ASSOCIATION OF REAL PROPERTY OWNERS IN LÓDZ AND OTHERS v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10
    Considering whether it is justified to apply Article 37 of the Convention in the context of the pilot-judgment procedure, the Court consistently held that it is a fundamental feature of that procedure that the Court's assessment of the situation complained of in a "pilot" case necessarily extends beyond the sole interests of the individual applicant and requires it to examine the case also from the perspective of the general measures that need to be taken in the interest of other already or potentially affected persons (see, among many other examples, Hutten-Czapska v. Poland [GC], no. 35014/97, § 238, ECHR 2006-VIII ; Broniowski v. Poland (friendly settlement) [GC], no. 31443/96, §§ 36-37; Hutten-Czapska v. Poland (friendly settlement) [GC], no. 35014/97, § 33; Association of Real Property Owners in Lódź and Others v. Poland (dec.), no. 3485/02, § 83, ECHR 2011 (extracts); Greens and M.T. v. the United Kingdom, nos.
  • EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 9095/08

    FACONDIS v. CYPRUS

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10
    To this end, the Court has examined the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Sp. z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03, 18 September 2007; Facondis v. Cyprus, no. 9095/08, 27 May 2010; and Messana v. Italy, no. 26128/04, § 23, 9 February 2017).
  • EGMR, 23.11.2010 - 60041/08

    GREENS ET M.T. c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10
    60041/08 and 60054/08, § 111, ECHR 2010 (extracts); Kuric and Others v. Slovenia [GC], no. 26828/06, § 413, ECHR 2012 (extracts); Kuric and Others v. Slovenia (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 26828/06, § 138 ECHR 2014; Anastasov and Others v. Slovenia (dec.) no. 65020/13, 18 October 2016, § 90).
  • EGMR, 28.04.2008 - 35014/97

    HUTTEN-CZAPSKA c. POLOGNE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 53491/10
    Considering whether it is justified to apply Article 37 of the Convention in the context of the pilot-judgment procedure, the Court consistently held that it is a fundamental feature of that procedure that the Court's assessment of the situation complained of in a "pilot" case necessarily extends beyond the sole interests of the individual applicant and requires it to examine the case also from the perspective of the general measures that need to be taken in the interest of other already or potentially affected persons (see, among many other examples, Hutten-Czapska v. Poland [GC], no. 35014/97, § 238, ECHR 2006-VIII ; Broniowski v. Poland (friendly settlement) [GC], no. 31443/96, §§ 36-37; Hutten-Czapska v. Poland (friendly settlement) [GC], no. 35014/97, § 33; Association of Real Property Owners in Lódź and Others v. Poland (dec.), no. 3485/02, § 83, ECHR 2011 (extracts); Greens and M.T. v. the United Kingdom, nos.
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   LG Frankfurt/Main, 14.06.2011 - O 345/10   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2011,84860
LG Frankfurt/Main, 14.06.2011 - O 345/10 (https://dejure.org/2011,84860)
LG Frankfurt/Main, Entscheidung vom 14.06.2011 - O 345/10 (https://dejure.org/2011,84860)
LG Frankfurt/Main, Entscheidung vom 14. Juni 2011 - O 345/10 (https://dejure.org/2011,84860)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,84860) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Hinweis zu den Links:
Zu grauen Einträgen liegen derzeit keine weiteren Informationen vor. Sie können diese Links aber nutzen, um die Einträge beispielsweise in Ihre Merkliste aufzunehmen.

Verfahrensgang

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht