Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LAHNIFI v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Zitiert selbst (2)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 9214/80

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 39329/98

  The Court notes in this context, however, that due consideration should be given to the circumstance that in light of the Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom judgment (28 May 1985, Series A no. 94, p. 34, § 68) the proposition is supported that in cases where a parent has achieved settled status in a country and wants to be reunited with her or his children who, for the time being, have been left behind in their country of origin, it may be unreasonable to give the parent the choice between giving up the position which she/he has acquired in the country of settlement or to renounce the mutual enjoyment by parent and child of each other's company which constitutes a fundamental element of family life.
• EGMR, 07.11.2000 - 31519/96

  KWAKYE-NTI ET DUFIE contre les PAYS-BAS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 39329/98

  In these circumstances, the State cannot be said to have failed to strike a fair balance between the applicants' interests on the one hand and its own interest in controlling immigration on the other (cf. Ahmut v. the Netherlands, loc. cit., p. 2033-2034, §§ 71- 73; Kwakye-Nti and Dufie v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 31519/96, 7.11.2000; and P.R. v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 39391/97, 7.11.2000).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 03.10.2014 - 12738/10

  [ENG]

  Or, dès lors qu'elle avait choisi de ne pas solliciter de visa de séjour temporaire depuis le Surinam avant de se rendre aux Pays-Bas, la requérante n'était nullement en droit d'espérer obtenir un permis de séjour en mettant les autorités néerlandaises devant le fait accompli de sa présence dans le pays (Ramos Andrade c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 53675/00, 6 juillet 2004 ; Chandra et autres c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 53102/99, 13 mai 2003 ; Adnane c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 50568/99, 6 novembre 2001 ; Mensah c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 47042/99, 9 octobre 2001 ; Lahnifi c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 39329/98 ; 13 février 2001 ; Kwakye-Nti et Dufie c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 31519/96, 7 novembre 2000).
• EGMR, 05.04.2005 - 43786/04

  BENAMAR v. THE NETHERLANDS

  In these circumstances the respondent State cannot be said to have failed to strike a fair balance between the applicants' interests on the one hand and its own interest in controlling immigration on the other (see Ramos Andrade v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 53675/00, 6 July 2004; Chandra and Others v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 53102/99, 13 May 2003; Adnane v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 50568/99, 6 November 2001; Mensah v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 47042/99, 9 October 2001; Lahnifi v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 39329/98; 13 February 2001; and Kwakye-Nti and Dufie v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 31519/96, 7 November 2000).
• EGMR, 06.11.2001 - 50568/99

  ADNANE v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Noting that the second applicant has substantial links with Morocco, where she was born and has lived for most part of her life, and finding that it had not been established that the first applicant's parents or other members of the second applicant's family would be unable to provide for her care, if need be, with financial support by the first applicant, the Court finds that it cannot be said that the Netherlands State failed to strike a fair balance between the applicants' interests on the one hand and its own interest in controlling immigration on the other (cf. Ahmut v. the Netherlands, loc. cit., p. 2033-2034, §§ 71- 73; Kwakye-Nti and Dufie v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 31519/96, 7.11.2000; P.R. v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 39391/97, 7.11.2000; and Lahnifi v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 39329/98, 13.2.2001).