Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ABDI v. DENMARK

  Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Expulsion;Article 8-1 - Respect for private life) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ABDI v. DENMARK

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

Wird zitiert von ... (20)Zitiert selbst (7)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Einstufung des in französischer Haft zugefügten Übels als Folter - Verpflichtung …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 41643/19

  The Court reiterates that the purpose of the rule on exhaustion of domestic remedies is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity to prevent or put right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, among many other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 25.03.2010 - 40601/05

  Rechtssache M. gegen DEUTSCHLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 41643/19

  In the present case, the Court does not call into question that the applicant's crime leading to the expulsion order was of such a nature that he posed a serious threat to public order at the time (see also, inter alia, Mutlag v Germany, no. 40601/05, §§ 61-62, 25 March 2010, and Balogun v. the United Kingdom, no. 60286/09, § 53, 10 April 2012).
• EGMR, 27.10.2005 - 32231/02

  Ausweisung, Schutz von Ehe und Familie, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 41643/19

  Thus in, for example, Ezzouhdi v. France, no. 47160/99, § 34 13 February 2001, Keles v. Germany, no. 32231/02, § 66, 27 October 2005, and Bousarra v. France, no. 25672/07, § 53, 23 September 2010, given the specific circumstances in each case, the Court found the imposition of a definitive expulsion order in breach of Article 8 of the Convention.

• EGMR, 01.12.2016 - 77036/11

  SALEM v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 41643/19

  The relevant provisions of the Aliens Act (Udlændingeloven) relating to expulsion have been set out in detail, for example, in Munir Johana v. Denmark (no. 56803/18, §§ 22-26, 12 January 2021) and Salem v. Denmark, (no. 77036/11, §§ 49-52, 1 December 2016).
• EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 60286/09

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 41643/19

  In the present case, the Court does not call into question that the applicant's crime leading to the expulsion order was of such a nature that he posed a serious threat to public order at the time (see also, inter alia, Mutlag v Germany, no. 40601/05, §§ 61-62, 25 March 2010, and Balogun v. the United Kingdom, no. 60286/09, § 53, 10 April 2012).
• EGMR, 12.01.2021 - 56803/18

  MUNIR JOHANA v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 41643/19

  The relevant provisions of the Aliens Act (Udlændingeloven) relating to expulsion have been set out in detail, for example, in Munir Johana v. Denmark (no. 56803/18, §§ 22-26, 12 January 2021) and Salem v. Denmark, (no. 77036/11, §§ 49-52, 1 December 2016).
• EGMR, 16.05.2017 - 25748/15

  HAMESEVIC v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 41643/19

  The crime was of such a nature that it could have had serious consequences for the lives of others (see, for example, Salem, cited above, § 66, 1 December 2016, and Hamesevic v. Denmark (dec.), no. 25748/15, § 32, 16 May 2017).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 12.11.2024 - 5199/23

  SHARAFANE v. DENMARK

  Rn. 56 In the present case, the Court does not call into question the finding that the applicant's offence leading to the expulsion order was of such a nature that he posed a serious threat to public order at the time (see, among other authorities, Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, § 39, 14 September 2021; Mutlag, cited above, §§ 61-62; see also, mutatis mutandis, Sarac, § 34; Nguyen, § 35; Noorzae, § 32; and Sharifi, § 33, all cited above).
• EGMR, 12.11.2024 - 14171/23

  AL-HABEEB v. DENMARK

  Rn. 61 In the present case, the Court does not call into question the finding that the applicant's offence leading to the expulsion order was of such a nature that he posed a serious threat to public order (see, among other authorities and mutatis mutandis, Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, § 39, 14 September 2021; Mutlag, cited above, §§ 61-62; see also, mutatis mutandis, Sarac, § 34; Nguyen, § 35; Noorzae, § 32; and Sharifi, § 33, all cited above).
• EGMR, 30.11.2021 - 40240/19

  AVCI v. DENMARK

  While the subsidiary role of the Court is fundamental to the Convention system, it does not mean, however, that the actions and conduct of national authorities are beyond the scrutiny of the Court (see Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, §§ 30-45, 14 September 2021 (not yet final)).

• EGMR, 15.07.2025 - 2852/24

  MIARI v. DENMARK

  The Court has accepted that this remedy is adequate and effective for the purpose of bringing an application before it (see Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, § 22, 14 September 2021).
• EGMR, 05.09.2023 - 44810/20

  NOORZAE v. DENMARK

  The crimes were of such a nature that they could have had serious consequences for the lives of others (see, for example, Avci v. Denmark, no. 40240/19, § 30, 30 November 2021, and Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, § 33, 14 September 2021, and the cases cited therein).
• EGMR, 05.09.2023 - 31434/21

  SHARIFI v. DENMARK

  The offence was of such a nature that it could have had serious consequences for the lives of others (see, for example, Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, § 33, 14 September 2021, and the cases cited therein).
• EGMR, 19.03.2026 - 15860/22

  HUSSAIN v. DENMARK

  Rn. 7 The Court also notes the numerous cases against Denmark concerning the expulsion of settled immigrants (see, among other authorities, Miari v. Denmark, no. 2852/24, 15 July 2025; Sharafane v. Denmark, no. 5199/23, 12 November 2024; Al-Habeeb v. Denmark, no. 14171/23, 12 November 2024; Savuran v. Denmark, no. 3645/23, 12 November 2024; Winther v. Denmark, no. 9588/21, 12 November 2024; Noorzae v. Denmark, no. 44810/20, 5 September 2023; Sharifi v. Denmark, no. 31434/21, 5 September 2023; Al-Masudi v. Denmark, no. 35740/21, 5 September 2023; Avci v. Denmark, no. 40240/19, 30 November 2021; and Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, 14 September 2021), and concerning the expulsion of immigrants who entered the country as adults (see, for example, Assem Hassan Ali v. Denmark, no. 25593/14, 23 October 2018; Salem v. Denmark, no. 77036/11, 1 December 2016; Hamesevic v. Denmark (dec.), no. 25748/15, 16 May 2017; Lagergren v. Denmark (dec.), no. 18668/03, 16 October 2006; and Bajrami v. Denmark (dec.) [Committee], no. 24379/20, 22 February 2022).
• EGMR, 09.04.2024 - 2116/21

  NGUYEN v. DENMARK

  Rn. 35 In the present case, the Court does not call into question the finding that the applicant's offence leading to the expulsion order was of such a nature that she posed a threat to public order at the time (see also, among other authorities and mutatis mutandis, Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, § 39, 14 September 2021; Mutlag, cited above, §§ 61-62; Balogun, cited above, § 53; Noorzae, cited above, § 32: and Sharifi, cited above, § 33).
• EGMR, 05.09.2023 - 35740/21

  AL-MASUDI v. DENMARK

  Those crimes were of such a nature that they could have had serious consequences for the lives of others (see, for example, Avci v. Denmark, no. 40240/19, § 30, 30 November 2021, and Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, § 33, 14 September 2021, and the cases cited therein).
• EGMR, 22.02.2022 - 31572/19

  HUSSAIN v. DENMARK

  Therefore, the Supreme Court could rightly assume that the applicant did not have a "family life" in Denmark, and deal only with the "private life" aspect (see also Abdi v. Denmark, no. 41643/19, § 31, 14 September 2021 [not final yet] and Mohammad v. Denmark (dec.), [Committee], no 16711/15, § 26, 20 November 2018).
• EGMR, 12.11.2024 - 9588/21

  WINTHER v. DENMARK
• EGMR, 25.01.2024 - 32739/21

  PAYAM v. DENMARK
• EGMR, 25.01.2024 - 54157/21

  KURLAND v. DENMARK
• EGMR, 25.01.2024 - 60766/19

  FATEH v. DENMARK and 1 other application
• EGMR, 25.01.2024 - 21783/22

  CAKMAK v. DENMARK
• EGMR, 25.01.2024 - 61126/19

  BELGACEM v. DENMARK
• EGMR, 05.09.2023 - 18646/22

  GOMA v. DENMARK
• EGMR, 25.01.2024 - 11093/22

  DAVUD KIBAR v. DENMARK
• EGMR - 24837/24 (anhängig)

  ABUKAR v. DENMARK
• EGMR - 20848/24 (anhängig)

  M.S. v. DENMARK