Weitere Entscheidungen unten: EGMR, 10.10.2002 | EGMR, 26.06.2001

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 02.12.2011 - 27229/95, 57067/00, 35574/97, 12350/04, 29392/95, 33218/96, 38719/97   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2011,89691
EGMR, 02.12.2011 - 27229/95, 57067/00, 35574/97, 12350/04, 29392/95, 33218/96, 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2011,89691)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 02.12.2011 - 27229/95, 57067/00, 35574/97, 12350/04, 29392/95, 33218/96, 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2011,89691)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 02. Dezember 2011 - 27229/95, 57067/00, 35574/97, 12350/04, 29392/95, 33218/96, 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2011,89691)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,89691) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KEENAN ET 6 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LE ROYAUME-UNI

    Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises permettant d'éviter de nouvelles violations. Versement des sommes prévues dans l'arrêt (französisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KEENAN AND 6 OTHER CASES AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Information given by the government concerning measures taken to prevent new violations. Payment of the sums provided for in the judgment (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

 
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 ... (172)

  • EGMR, 19.02.2009 - 3455/05

    A. u. a. ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

    Although Article 3 cannot be construed as laying down a general obligation to release detainees on health grounds, it nonetheless imposes an obligation on the State to protect the physical and mental well-being of persons deprived of their liberty, for example by providing them with the requisite medical assistance (see Hurtado v. Switzerland, judgment of 28 January 1994, § 79 opinion of the Commission, Series A no. 280-A; Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX; Aerts v. Belgium, judgment of 30 July 1998, § 66, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-V; Keenan v. the United Kingdom, no. 27229/95, § 111, ECHR 2001-III).

    It is fundamental to the machinery of protection established by the Convention that the national systems themselves provide redress for breaches of its provisions, with the Court exercising a supervisory role subject to the principle of subsidiarity (Z. and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 29392/95, § 103, ECHR 2001-V).

  • EGMR, 13.12.2012 - 39630/09

    El Masri klagt gegen Mazedonien

    Combinée avec l'article 3, 1'obligation que l'article 1 de la Convention impose aux Hautes Parties contractantes de garantir à toute personne relevant de leur juridiction les droits et libertés consacrés par la Convention leur commande de prendre des mesures propres à empêcher que lesdites personnes ne soient soumises à des tortures ou à des traitements inhumains ou dégradants, même administrés par des particuliers (Z et autres c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 29392/95, § 73, CEDH 2001-V).
  • EGMR, 14.09.2010 - 2668/07

    DINK c. TURQUIE

    Pour qu'il y ait obligation positive, il doit être établi que les autorités savaient ou auraient dû savoir sur le moment qu'un individu donné était menacé de manière réelle et immédiate dans sa vie du fait des actes criminels d'un tiers et qu'elles n'ont pas pris, dans le cadre de leurs pouvoirs, les mesures qui, d'un point de vue raisonnable, auraient sans doute pallié ce risque (Keenan c. Royaume-Uni, no 27229/95, §§ 89-90, CEDH 2001-III, Opuz, précité, § 129, et Gongadzé c. Ukraine, no 34056/02, § 165, CEDH 2005-XI).

    La Cour rappelle que cette disposition exige que l'ordre interne offre un recours effectif habilitant l'instance nationale à connaître du contenu d'un grief défendable fondé sur la Convention (Z et autres c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 29392/95, § 108, CEDH 2001-V).

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2002,23501
EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2002,23501)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 10.10.2002 - 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2002,23501)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 10. Oktober 2002 - 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2002,23501)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2002,23501) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

Verfahrensgang

 
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 ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

  • EGMR, 11.07.2002 - 28957/95

    Christine Goodwin ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    The applicable interest rate is the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points (see no. 28957/95, Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], judgment of 11 July 2002, to be published in ECHR 2002-..., § 124).
  • EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

    GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    Article 6 § 1 of the Convention embodies the right of access to a court for the determination of civil rights and obligations (see the Golder v. the United Kingdom judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18, p. 18, § 36).
  • EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87

    Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    Article 8 of the Convention may impose positive obligations to protect the physical and moral integrity of an individual from other persons (see the X. and Y. v. the Netherlands judgment of 26 March 1985, Series A no. 91, p. 11, § 22, and Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom judgment of 25 March 1993, Series A no. 247-C, p. 61, § 36).
  • EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78

    ASHINGDANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    Where the individual's access is limited either by operation of law or in fact, the Court will examine whether the limitation imposed impaired the essence of the right and in particular whether it pursued a legitimate aim and there was a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be achieved (Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 93, pp. 24-25, § 57).
  • EGMR, 23.10.1985 - 8848/80

    BENTHEM v. THE NETHERLANDS

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    It will however apply to disputes of a "genuine and serious nature" concerning the actual existence of the right as well as to the scope or manner in which it is exercised (Benthem v. the Netherlands judgment of 23 October 1985, Series A no. 97, p. 15, § 32).
  • EGMR, 08.07.1986 - 9006/80

    LITHGOW AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    The Court recalls its constant case-law to the effect that "Article 6 § 1 extends only to contestations (disputes) over (civil) "rights and obligations" which can be said, at least on arguable grounds, to be recognised under domestic law; it does not itself guarantee any particular content for (civil) "rights and obligations" in the substantive law of the Contracting States" (see the James and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 21 February 1986, Series A no. 98, p. 46, § 81; the Lithgow and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 102, p. 70, § 192; the Holy Monasteries v. Greece judgment of 9 December 1994, Series A no. 301, p. 37, § 80).
  • EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75

    SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    Where there is a serious and genuine dispute as to the lawfulness of such an interference, going either to the very existence or the scope of the asserted civil right, Article 6 § 1 entitles the individual "to have this question of domestic law determined by a tribunal" (see the Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden judgment of 23 September 1982, Series A no. 52, p. 30, § 81; see also the Tre Traktörer v. Sweden judgment of 27 July 1989, Series A no. 159, p. 18, § 40).
  • EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 10873/84

    TRE TRAKTÖRER AKTIEBOLAG v. SWEDEN

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    Where there is a serious and genuine dispute as to the lawfulness of such an interference, going either to the very existence or the scope of the asserted civil right, Article 6 § 1 entitles the individual "to have this question of domestic law determined by a tribunal" (see the Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden judgment of 23 September 1982, Series A no. 52, p. 30, § 81; see also the Tre Traktörer v. Sweden judgment of 27 July 1989, Series A no. 159, p. 18, § 40).
  • EGMR, 09.12.1994 - 13427/87

    RAFFINERIES GRECQUES STRAN ET STRATIS ANDREADIS c. GRÈCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    The Court recalls its constant case-law to the effect that "Article 6 § 1 extends only to contestations (disputes) over (civil) "rights and obligations" which can be said, at least on arguable grounds, to be recognised under domestic law; it does not itself guarantee any particular content for (civil) "rights and obligations" in the substantive law of the Contracting States" (see the James and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 21 February 1986, Series A no. 98, p. 46, § 81; the Lithgow and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 102, p. 70, § 192; the Holy Monasteries v. Greece judgment of 9 December 1994, Series A no. 301, p. 37, § 80).
  • EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 18139/91

    TOLSTOY MILOSLAVSKY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97
    It may be subject to legitimate restrictions, for example, statutory limitation periods, security for costs orders, regulations concerning minors and persons of unsound mind (see the Stubbings and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 22 October 1996, Reports 1996-IV, pp. 1502-3, §§ 51-52; the Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 316-B, pp. 80-81, §§ 62-67; the Golder judgment, cited above, p. 19, § 39).
  • EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

    DURDEVIC v. CROATIA

    To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII; Bevacqua and S. v. Bulgaria, no. 71127/01, § 65, 12 June 2008; and Sandra Jankovic, cited above, § 45).
  • EGMR, 14.10.2010 - 55164/08

    A. v. CROATIA

    To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII; Bevacqua and S. v. Bulgaria, no. 71127/01, § 65, 12 June 2008; and Sandra Jankovic, cited above, § 45).
  • EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 9718/03

    GEORGEL AND GEORGETA STOICESCU v. ROMANIA

    The Court has previously held, in various contexts, that the concept of private life includes a person's physical and psychological integrity and that the States have a positive obligation to prevent breaches of the physical and moral integrity of an individual by other persons when the authorities knew or ought to have known of those breaches (see X and Y v. the Netherlands, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; and M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 73 and 149, ECHR 2003-XII,).
  • EGMR, 30.11.2010 - 2660/03

    HAJDUOVÁ v. SLOVAKIA

    To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y v. the Netherlands, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002 and M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII, and most recently the Court's judgment in the case of A v. Croatia, no. 55164/08, § 60, 14 October 2010 (not yet final)).
  • EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 2912/11

    KOWAL v. POLAND

    To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y v. the Netherlands, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002 and M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII).
  • EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 7446/12

    REMETIN v. CROATIA (No. 2)

    To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y v. the Netherlands, 26 March 1985, §§ 22 and 23, Series A no. 91; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII, and Sandra Jankovic v. Croatia, no. 38478/05, § 45, 5 March 2009).
  • EGMR, 23.11.2010 - 28326/09

    P.F. AND E.F. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Under Article 8 the States have a duty to protect the physical and moral integrity of an individual from other persons (see X and Y v. the Netherlands, 26 March 1985, §§ 22 and 23, Series A no. 91; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002 and M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII).
  • EGMR, 26.03.2009 - 36082/02

    RADIONOVA v. RUSSIA

    To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y v. the Netherlands, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII; and Bevacqua and S. v. Bulgaria, no. 71127/01, § 65, 12 June 2008).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 26.06.2001 - 38719/97   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2001,32472
EGMR, 26.06.2001 - 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2001,32472)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 26.06.2001 - 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2001,32472)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 26. Juni 2001 - 38719/97 (https://dejure.org/2001,32472)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2001,32472) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

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