Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KRUSKOVIC v. CROATIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Violation of Art. 8 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 46185/08
• EGMR, 17.10.2017 - 46185/08

Papierfundstellen

• FamRZ 2011, 1485

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

• EGMR, 26.05.1994 - 16969/90

  KEEGAN v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 46185/08

  As regards the issue of paternity, the Court has held on numerous occasions that paternity proceedings do fall within the scope of Article 8 (see, for example, Rasmussen v. Denmark, 28 November 1984, § 33, Series A no. 87, and Keegan v. Ireland, 26 May 1994, § 45, Series A no. 290).
• EGMR, 31.01.1986 - 8734/79

  BARTHOLD v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 46185/08

  Under the system of protection established by the Convention it is thus for the national authorities to make the initial assessment both of the existence of a problem of public concern warranting measures of restriction of the personal rights and of the remedial action to be taken (see, mutatis mutandis, Handyside v. the United Kingdom, 7 December 1976, § 48, Series A no. 24, and James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 46, Series A no. 98).
• EGMR, 28.11.1984 - 8777/79

  RASMUSSEN v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 46185/08

  As regards the issue of paternity, the Court has held on numerous occasions that paternity proceedings do fall within the scope of Article 8 (see, for example, Rasmussen v. Denmark, 28 November 1984, § 33, Series A no. 87, and Keegan v. Ireland, 26 May 1994, § 45, Series A no. 290).

 
• EGMR, 07.02.2002 - 53176/99

  MIKULIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 46185/08

  The Court has already held that the legal relationship between a child born out of wedlock and his or her natural father falls within the ambit of Article 8 of the Convention (see Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, §§ 50-55, ECHR 2002-I.).
• EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72

  HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 46185/08

  Under the system of protection established by the Convention it is thus for the national authorities to make the initial assessment both of the existence of a problem of public concern warranting measures of restriction of the personal rights and of the remedial action to be taken (see, mutatis mutandis, Handyside v. the United Kingdom, 7 December 1976, § 48, Series A no. 24, and James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 46, Series A no. 98).
• EGMR, 27.10.1994 - 18535/91

  KROON AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 46185/08

  In this connection, the Court has held that the notion of "family life" in Article 8 is not confined solely to marriage-based relationships but may also encompass other de facto "family ties" where sufficient constancy is present (see, for example, Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands, 27 October 1994, § 30, Series A no. 297-C).
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92

  HOKKANEN v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 46185/08

  The Court will therefore examine whether Croatia, in its handling of the issue of the applicant's paternity of K., is in breach of its positive obligation under Article 8 of the Convention (see, for instance, Hokkanen v. Finland, 23 September 1994, § 55, Series A no. 299-A, and, mutatis mutandis, Handyside v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 49).

• EGMR, 22.03.2012 - 23338/09

  Vaterschaftsprozess: Welchen Papa braucht das Kind?

  Juli 2010; Kruskovic ./. Kroatien, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 46185/08, Rdnr. 20, 21.