Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
DICKSON c. ROYAUME-UNI
Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 12, Art. 41 MRK
Violation de l'art. 8 Non-lieu à examiner l'art. 12 Préjudice moral - réparation pécuniaire Remboursement partiel frais et dépens (französisch) - Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
DICKSON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 12, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 8 Not necessary to examine Art. 12 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award (englisch) - Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte
(englisch)
Kurzfassungen/Presse
- RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
- EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
- EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 44362/04
Wird zitiert von ... (21) Neu Zitiert selbst (8)
- EKMR, 13.10.1977 - 7114/75
HAMER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
Having examined relevant Commission jurisprudence (no. 6564/74, Commission decision of 21 May 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 2, p. 105; no. 8166/78, Commission decision of 3 October 1978, DR 13, p. 241; Hamer v. the United Kingdom, no. 7114/75, Commission's report of 13 December 1979, DR 24, p. 5; Draper v. the United Kingdom, no. 8186/78, Commission's report of 10 July 1980, DR 24, p. 72; and E.L.H. and P.B.H. v. the United Kingdom, nos.For example, prisoners may not be ill-treated, subjected to inhuman or degrading punishment or conditions contrary to Article 3 of the Convention (see, among many authorities, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, ECHR 2002-VI; Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, no. 50901/99, ECHR 2003-II); they continue to enjoy the right to respect for family life (Ploski v. Poland, no. 26761/95, judgment of 12 November 2002; X. v. the United Kingdom, no. 9054/80, Commission decision of 8 October 1982, DR 30, p. 113), the right to freedom of expression (Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, §§ 126-145, ECHR 2003-XII, T. v. the United Kingdom, no. 8231/78, Commission report of 12 October 1983, DR 49, p. 5, §§ 44-84), the right to practise their religion (Poltoratskiy v. Ukraine, no. 38812/97, §§ 167-171, ECHR 2003-V), the right of effective access to a lawyer or to court for the purposes of Article 6 (Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 June 1984, Series A, no. 80; Golder v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A, no. 18), the right to respect for correspondence (Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61) and the right to marry (Hamer v. the United Kingdom, no. 7114/75, Commission report of 13 December 1979, DR 24, p. 5; Draper v. the United Kingdom, no. 8186/78, Commission report of 10 July 1980, DR 24, p. 72).
- EKMR, 22.10.1997 - 32094/96
E.L.H. AND P.B.H. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
32094/96 and 32568/96, Commission decision of 22 October 1997, DR 91-A, p. 61), Lord Phillips summarised five Convention principles he considered thereby established:.The Court considers that Article 8 is applicable to the applicants" complaints in that the refusal of artificial insemination facilities concerned their private and family lives, which notions incorporate the right to respect for their decision to become genetic parents (see E.L.H. and P.B.H. v. the United Kingdom, nos. 32094/96 and 32568/96, Commission decision of 22 October 1997, DR 91-A, p. 61; Kalashnikov v. Russia (dec.), no. 47095/99, ECHR 2001-XI; Aliev v. Ukraine, no. 41220/98, § 187-89, 29 April 2003; and Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 6339/05, § 71-72, ECHR 2007-I).
- EGMR, 05.09.2002 - 50490/99
BOSO contre l'ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
The Court considers, as did the Chamber, that no separate issue arises under Article 12 of the Convention and that it is not therefore necessary also to examine the applicants" complaint under this provision (see E.L.H. and P.B.H. v. the United Kingdom, cited above, and Boso v. Italy (dec.), no. 50490/99, ECHR 2002-VII).
- EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70
GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
The Chamber judgment was consistent with the Court's case-law (see, notably, Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 45, Series A no. 18) and with that of the Commission (referred to by the Court of Appeal - see paragraph 24 above - in the above-mentioned Mellor case). - EGMR, 13.02.2003 - 42326/98
Schutz des Rechts auf Achtung des Privatlebens und Familienlebens; Möglichkeit …
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
In particular, in both instances regard must be had to the fair balance to be struck between the competing interests (see Odièvre v. France [GC], no. 42326/98, § 40, ECHR 2003-III, and Evans, cited above, § 75). - EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72
SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
For example, prisoners may not be ill-treated, subjected to inhuman or degrading punishment or conditions contrary to Article 3 of the Convention (see, among many authorities, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, ECHR 2002-VI; Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, no. 50901/99, ECHR 2003-II); they continue to enjoy the right to respect for family life (Ploski v. Poland, no. 26761/95, judgment of 12 November 2002; X. v. the United Kingdom, no. 9054/80, Commission decision of 8 October 1982, DR 30, p. 113), the right to freedom of expression (Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, §§ 126-145, ECHR 2003-XII, T. v. the United Kingdom, no. 8231/78, Commission report of 12 October 1983, DR 49, p. 5, §§ 44-84), the right to practise their religion (Poltoratskiy v. Ukraine, no. 38812/97, §§ 167-171, ECHR 2003-V), the right of effective access to a lawyer or to court for the purposes of Article 6 (Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 June 1984, Series A, no. 80; Golder v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A, no. 18), the right to respect for correspondence (Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61) and the right to marry (Hamer v. the United Kingdom, no. 7114/75, Commission report of 13 December 1979, DR 24, p. 5; Draper v. the United Kingdom, no. 8186/78, Commission report of 10 July 1980, DR 24, p. 72). - EKMR, 06.03.1982 - 8231/78
X. v. the UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
For example, prisoners may not be ill-treated, subjected to inhuman or degrading punishment or conditions contrary to Article 3 of the Convention (see, among many authorities, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, ECHR 2002-VI; Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, no. 50901/99, ECHR 2003-II); they continue to enjoy the right to respect for family life (Ploski v. Poland, no. 26761/95, judgment of 12 November 2002; X. v. the United Kingdom, no. 9054/80, Commission decision of 8 October 1982, DR 30, p. 113), the right to freedom of expression (Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, §§ 126-145, ECHR 2003-XII, T. v. the United Kingdom, no. 8231/78, Commission report of 12 October 1983, DR 49, p. 5, §§ 44-84), the right to practise their religion (Poltoratskiy v. Ukraine, no. 38812/97, §§ 167-171, ECHR 2003-V), the right of effective access to a lawyer or to court for the purposes of Article 6 (Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 June 1984, Series A, no. 80; Golder v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A, no. 18), the right to respect for correspondence (Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61) and the right to marry (Hamer v. the United Kingdom, no. 7114/75, Commission report of 13 December 1979, DR 24, p. 5; Draper v. the United Kingdom, no. 8186/78, Commission report of 10 July 1980, DR 24, p. 72). - EKMR, 08.10.1982 - 9054/80
A. v. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
For example, prisoners may not be ill-treated, subjected to inhuman or degrading punishment or conditions contrary to Article 3 of the Convention (see, among many authorities, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, ECHR 2002-VI; Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, no. 50901/99, ECHR 2003-II); they continue to enjoy the right to respect for family life (Ploski v. Poland, no. 26761/95, judgment of 12 November 2002; X. v. the United Kingdom, no. 9054/80, Commission decision of 8 October 1982, DR 30, p. 113), the right to freedom of expression (Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, §§ 126-145, ECHR 2003-XII, T. v. the United Kingdom, no. 8231/78, Commission report of 12 October 1983, DR 49, p. 5, §§ 44-84), the right to practise their religion (Poltoratskiy v. Ukraine, no. 38812/97, §§ 167-171, ECHR 2003-V), the right of effective access to a lawyer or to court for the purposes of Article 6 (Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 June 1984, Series A, no. 80; Golder v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A, no. 18), the right to respect for correspondence (Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61) and the right to marry (Hamer v. the United Kingdom, no. 7114/75, Commission report of 13 December 1979, DR 24, p. 5; Draper v. the United Kingdom, no. 8186/78, Commission report of 10 July 1980, DR 24, p. 72).
- BVerfG, 26.02.2008 - 1 BvR 1602/07
Caroline von Monaco III
In Übereinstimmung hiermit ist auch für die bei der Auslegung der deutschen Grundrechte bedeutsamen Vorgaben der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention in der Rechtsprechung des Gerichtshofs ein eigenständiger Beurteilungsspielraum der nationalen Gerichte anerkannt (vgl. EGMR, - Große Kammer -, Urteil vom 4. Dezember 2007, Beschwerde-Nr. 44362/04, Dickson gegen Großbritannien, §§ 77 ff.). - EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 24027/07
Babar Ahmad u.a. ./. Vereinigtes Königreich
Where there are limitations on the services provided, for example restrictions on group prayer, these are necessary and inevitable consequences of imprisonment (see, mutatis mutandis, Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 68, ECHR 2007-V). - EGMR, 10.03.2011 - 2700/10
KIYUTIN c. RUSSIE
The existence of a European consensus is an additional consideration relevant for determining whether the respondent State should be afforded a narrow or a wide margin of appreciation (see Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 81, ECHR 2007-XIII, and S.L. v. Austria, no. 45330/99, § 31, ECHR 2003-I (extracts)).
- EGMR, 07.10.2010 - 30078/06
KONSTANTIN MARKIN c. RUSSIE
En pareil cas, la Cour respecte généralement le choix politique du législateur, à moins qu'il ait un «fondement manifestement déraisonnable» (voir mutatis mutandis, Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, § 78, CEDH 2007-XIII). - EGMR, 11.12.2014 - 28859/11
DUBSKÁ AND KREJZOVÁ v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
It further covers issues such as the decision whether or not to have a child or to become genetic parents (see Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 6339/05, § 71, ECHR 2007-I), and the right of prisoners to procreate while in prison (see Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 66, ECHR 2007-V). - EGMR, 18.02.2014 - 43912/10
JALBA v. ROMANIA
These obligations may involve the adoption of measures designed to secure respect for private and family life even in the sphere of the relations of individuals between themselves (see Odièvre v. France [GC], no. 42326/98, § 40, ECHR 2003-III, and Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 70, ECHR 2007-V). - EGMR, 03.12.2015 - 74820/10
YAROSHOVETS AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
At the same time, the Contracting States enjoy a wide margin of appreciation in determining the steps to be taken to ensure compliance with that Convention obligation with due regard to the needs and resources of the community and of individuals (see, for instance, Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 81, ECHR 2007-V). - EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 13621/08
HORYCH v. POLAND
(see, muatis mutandis, Hirst (no. 2) v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 74025/01, ECHR 2005-IX, § 69; and Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, ECHR 2007-..., §§ 67-68). - EGMR, 30.03.2010 - 20928/05
PETRENCO v. MOLDOVA
These obligations may involve the adoption of measures designed to secure respect for private and family life even in the sphere of the relations of individuals between themselves (see Odièvre v. France [GC], no. 42326/98, § 40, ECHR 2003-III; and Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 70, ECHR 2007-XIII). - EGMR, 16.10.2008 - 39058/05
KYRIAKIDES v. CYPRUS
The applicable principles are nonetheless similar (see Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 70, ECHR 2007-...). - EGMR, 04.01.2008 - 23800/06
SHELLEY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 33761/05
TERESHCHENKO v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 09.07.2013 - 42615/06
VARNAS v. LITHUANIA
- EGMR, 12.02.2013 - 152/04
YEFIMENKO v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 28.10.2010 - 23284/04
BORIS POPOV v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 23.02.2012 - 39758/05
TROSIN v. UKRAINE
- EGMR, 07.05.2009 - 3451/05
KALACHEVA v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 39633/10
COSTEL GACIU v. ROMANIA
- EGMR, 13.03.2014 - 63763/11
ZINCHENKO v. UKRAINE
- EGMR, 29.05.2012 - 37862/02
EPNERS-GEFNERS v. LATVIA
- EGMR, 02.03.2010 - 52990/08
DAVISON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
DICKSON c. ROYAUME-UNI
Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 12, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3 MRK
Non-violation de l'art. 8 Non-violation de l'art. 12 (französisch) - Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
DICKSON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 12, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3 MRK
No violation of Art. 8 No violation of Art. 12 (englisch) - Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte
(englisch)
Kurzfassungen/Presse
- RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
- EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
- EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 44362/04
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (8)
- EGMR, 11.07.2002 - 28957/95
Christine Goodwin ./. Vereinigtes Königreich
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
Nor can the Court discern in this regard any "evolving convergence as to the standards to be achieved" (Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no.28957/95, § 74, ECHR 2002 VI). - EGMR, 17.10.1986 - 9532/81
REES v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
Moreover, any such obligation must not be interpreted in such a way as to impose an impossible or disproportionate burden on the authorities (Rees v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 17 October 1986, Series A no. 106, § 37, Gaskin v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 160, § 42; Sheffield and Horsham v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 30 July 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 V, § 52; Osman v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, § 116; and Appleby and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 44306/98, § 40, ECHR 2003 VI). - EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72
SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
The fact of such control is not, in principle, incompatible with the Convention (Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, § 98; the above-cited decision in Kalashnikov v. Russia; Klamecki v. Poland (no. 2), no. 31583/96, § 144, 3 April 2003; and Aliev v. Ukraine, cited above, at § 187).
- EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 10454/83
GASKIN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
Moreover, any such obligation must not be interpreted in such a way as to impose an impossible or disproportionate burden on the authorities (Rees v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 17 October 1986, Series A no. 106, § 37, Gaskin v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 160, § 42; Sheffield and Horsham v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 30 July 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 V, § 52; Osman v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, § 116; and Appleby and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 44306/98, § 40, ECHR 2003 VI). - EGMR, 29.04.2003 - 41220/98
ALIEV v. UKRAINE
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
As to the present case, artificial insemination relates to the applicants" private and family life in such a way that the question of their access thereto falls within the ambit of Article 8 (the above-cited cases of E.L.H. and P.B.H v. the United Kingdom, Kalashnikov v. Russia (dec.), no. 47095/99, ECHR 2001-XI and Aliev v. Ukraine, no. 41220/98, § 187-189, 29 April 2003. - EGMR, 05.09.2002 - 50490/99
BOSO contre l'ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
The Court recalls that an interference with family life which is justified under paragraph 2 of Article 8 of the Convention cannot at the same time constitute a violation of Article 12 (Boso v. Italy (dec.), no. 50490/99, ECHR 2002 VII). - EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 26761/95
PLOSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
It is well established that prisoners do not forfeit their Convention rights following conviction and sentence and continue to enjoy all the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Convention save for the right to liberty: those rights include the right to continue to enjoy respect for family and private life (Hirst v. the United Kingdom (no. 2) [GC], no. 74025/01, § 69, ECHR 2005... citing, inter alia, Ploski v. Poland, no. 26761/95, judgment of 12 November 2002). - EGMR, 28.06.2001 - 70258/01
SELMANI v. SWITZERLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
The Court accepts that the boundaries between the State's positive and negative obligations under Article 8 do not lend themselves to precise definition (Selmani v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 70258/01, ECHR 2001 VII).
Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 44362/04 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
DICKSON 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
DICKSON v. 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
- EGMR, 18.04.2006 - 44362/04
- EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 44362/04
- EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 44362/04
Wird zitiert von ... (12)
- EGMR, 13.11.2012 - 47039/11
HRISTOZOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
In both contexts regard must be had to the fair balance that has to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and of the community as a whole (see, among other authorities, Powell and Rayner v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1990, § 41, Series A no. 172; Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 6339/05, § 75, ECHR 2007-I; and Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 70, ECHR 2007-V).There is no evidence that when adopting the regulations at issue, or those that succeeded them, the Minister of Health sought to weigh the competing interests or to assess the proportionality of the restriction (see, mutatis mutandis, Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 83 in limine, ECHR 2007-V) by, for instance, carrying out a public consultation process (contrast, mutatis mutandis, Hatton and Others, cited above, § 128).
- EGMR, 30.06.2015 - 41418/04
KHOROSHENKO c. RUSSIE
La Cour réaffirme sa jurisprudence bien établie selon laquelle les détenus continuent de jouir pendant leur détention de tous les droits et libertés fondamentaux garantis par la Convention, à l'exception du droit à la liberté (voir, par exemple, Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, § 67, CEDH 2007-V, citant Hirst c. Royaume-Uni (no 2) [GC], no 74025/01, § 69, CEDH 2005-IX, et Boulois c. Luxembourg [GC], no 37575/04, § 82, CEDH 2012).La Cour estime que la réglementation en la matière ne doit pas aboutir à des restrictions radicales, et que les États doivent développer leurs techniques d'appréciation de la proportionnalité de façon à permettre à leurs autorités de mettre en balance les intérêts individuels et collectifs concurrents et de prendre en compte les particularités de chaque cas d'espèce (voir, mutatis mutandis, Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, §§ 82-85, CEDH 2007-V).
- EGMR, 07.07.2011 - 37452/02
STUMMER c. AUTRICHE
Grâce à une connaissance directe de leur société et de ses besoins, les autorités nationales se trouvent en principe mieux placées que le juge international pour déterminer ce qui est d'utilité publique en matière économique ou en matière sociale, et la Cour respecte en principe la manière dont l'Etat conçoit les impératifs de l'utilité publique, sauf si son jugement se révèle « manifestement dépourvu de base raisonnable'(voir Andrejeva, précité, § 83 ; Stec et autres, précité, § 52 ; Carson et autres, précité, § 61 ; et, dans le contexte spécifique des droits des détenus, voir également Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, § 78, CEDH 2007-XIII).
- EGMR, 03.04.2012 - 42857/05
Zum Zeugnisverweigerungsrecht - Lebensgefährten dürfen im Strafprozess nicht …
L'ampleur de cette marge dépend d'un certain nombre d'éléments déterminés par les circonstances de la cause (voir, entre autres, Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, § 77, CEDH 2007-V, et A, B et C c. Irlande [GC], précité, § 232). - EGMR, 17.01.2023 - 40792/10
FEDOTOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Sur le premier point, la Cour a déjà affirmé que des aspects essentiels ou particulièrement importants de l'identité de l'individu étaient en jeu dans des affaires portant sur sa filiation (Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, § 78, CEDH 2007-V, et Mennesson, précité, § 80), l'accès aux informations concernant ses origines et l'identité de ses géniteurs (Odièvre, précité, § 29), son identité ethnique (Aksu c. Turquie [GC], nos 4149/04 et 41029/04, § 58, CEDH 2012) ou encore son identité sexuelle (A.P., Garçon et Nicot c. France, nos 79885/12 et 2 autres, § 123, 6 avril 2017). - EGMR, 13.06.2019 - 77633/16
MARCELLO VIOLA c. ITALIE (N° 2)
LES INSTRUMENTS EUROPÉENS ET INTERNATIONAUX PERTINENTS 52. Les textes de droit européen et international pertinents en l'espèce, notamment en matière de peines perpétuelles et de principe de réinsertion, sont présentés dans les arrêts Vinter et autres c. Royaume-Uni ([GC], nos 66069/09 et 2 autres, §§ 60-75 et 76-81, CEDH 2013 (extraits)), Dickson c. Royaume-Uni ([GC], no 44362/04, §§ 28-36, CEDH 2007-V) et Murray c. Pays-Bas ([GC] no 10511/10, §§ 58-65 et 70-76, 26 avril 2016). - EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 16986/12
ALEXANDRU ENACHE c. ROUMANIE
À cet égard, elle rappelle que les détenus continuent de jouir pendant leur détention de tous les droits et libertés fondamentaux garantis par la Convention, à l'exception du droit à la liberté (voir, par exemple, Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, § 67, CEDH 2007-V, et Boulois c. Luxembourg [GC], no 37575/04, § 82, CEDH 2012). - EGMR, 02.06.2009 - 36936/05
SZULUK v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Pour déterminer si une ingérence est «nécessaire dans une société démocratique», on peut tenir compte de la marge d'appréciation de l'Etat (voir, entre autres, Campbell, précité, § 44, Petrov c. Bulgarie, précité, § 44, et Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, § 77, CEDH 2007-XIII). - EGMR, 07.07.2022 - 81292/17
CHOCHOLÁC v. SLOVAKIA
The respondent Contracting Party's margin of appreciation in relation to the means for the protection of morals would accordingly be a wide one (see, for example, Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 78, ECHR 2007-V). - EGMR, 07.06.2022 - 70139/14
I.G.D. c. BULGARIE
En particulier, dans les deux cas, il faut avoir égard au juste équilibre à ménager entre les intérêts concurrents (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Odièvre c. France [GC], no 42326/98, § 40, CEDH 2003-III, et Dickson c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 44362/04, § 70, CEDH 2007-V). - EGMR, 16.05.2017 - 31818/10
GÖKSEN ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
- EGMR, 17.11.2015 - 36656/14
DOLOPOULOS c. GRÈCE