Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  HARJU v. FINLAND

  Art. 8 MRK
  Violation of Art. 8 (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (9)Zitiert selbst (11)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 04.05.2000 - 28341/95

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  Third, the person affected must be able, if need be with appropriate legal advice, to foresee the consequences of the domestic law for him, and fourth, the domestic law must be compatible with the rule of law (see, among many other authorities, Rotaru v. Romania [GC], no. 28341/95, § 52, ECHR 2000-V; Liberty and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 58243/00, § 59, 1 July 2008; and Kennedy v. the United Kingdom, no. 26839/05, § 151., ECHR 2010-).
• EGMR, 16.04.2002 - 37971/97

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  In a sphere covered by written law, the "law" is the enactment in force as the competent courts have interpreted it (see, inter alia, Société Colas Est and Others v. France, no. 37971/97, § 43, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 18.05.2010 - 26839/05

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  Third, the person affected must be able, if need be with appropriate legal advice, to foresee the consequences of the domestic law for him, and fourth, the domestic law must be compatible with the rule of law (see, among many other authorities, Rotaru v. Romania [GC], no. 28341/95, § 52, ECHR 2000-V; Liberty and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 58243/00, § 59, 1 July 2008; and Kennedy v. the United Kingdom, no. 26839/05, § 151., ECHR 2010-).

• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  Turning to the present case, the Court reiterates that it has already found in the case of Sallinen and Others v. Finland (no. 50882/99, § 89, 27 September 2005) that there was no independent or judicial supervision of the issuance of the search warrant as the decision to authorise the order was taken by the police themselves (see also, mutatis mutandis, Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, §§ 34-35, Series A no. 176-A; Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, § 90, Series A no. 61; and Sorvisto v. Finland, cited above, § 117).
• EGMR, 24.04.1990 - 11801/85

  KRUSLIN c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  Turning to the present case, the Court reiterates that it has already found in the case of Sallinen and Others v. Finland (no. 50882/99, § 89, 27 September 2005) that there was no independent or judicial supervision of the issuance of the search warrant as the decision to authorise the order was taken by the police themselves (see also, mutatis mutandis, Kruslin v. France, 24 April 1990, §§ 34-35, Series A no. 176-A; Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, § 90, Series A no. 61; and Sorvisto v. Finland, cited above, § 117).
• EGMR, 01.07.2008 - 58243/00

  LIBERTY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  Third, the person affected must be able, if need be with appropriate legal advice, to foresee the consequences of the domestic law for him, and fourth, the domestic law must be compatible with the rule of law (see, among many other authorities, Rotaru v. Romania [GC], no. 28341/95, § 52, ECHR 2000-V; Liberty and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 58243/00, § 59, 1 July 2008; and Kennedy v. the United Kingdom, no. 26839/05, § 151., ECHR 2010-).
• EGMR, 30.03.1989 - 10461/83

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  In this respect, the Court notes that its power to review compliance with domestic law is limited, it being in the first place for the national authorities, notably the courts, to interpret and apply that law (see, inter alia, Chappell v. the United Kingdom, 30 March 1989, § 54, Series A no. 152-A).
• VK Rheinland-Pfalz, 27.05.2005 - 15/05

  Nachprüfungsverfahren: Antragsbefugnis trotz fehlender Angebotsabgabe

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  15/05/2011.
• EGMR, 01.04.2008 - 73957/01

  VARGA c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  The applicant's right to respect for her home was thus violated by the fact that there was no prior judicial warrant and no possibility to obtain an effective judicial review a posteriori of either the decision to order the search or the manner in which it was conducted (see Varga v. Romania, no. 73957/01, § 73, 1 April 2008; and Isıldak v. Turkey, no. 12863/02, § 52, 30 September 2008).
• EGMR, 13.01.2009 - 19348/04

  Sorvisto ./. Finnland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 56716/09

  It is essential to have clear, detailed rules in this area, setting out safeguards against possible abuse or arbitrariness (see Sorvisto v. Finland, no. 19348/04, § 118, 13 January 2009).
• EGMR, 30.09.2008 - 12863/02

  ISILDAK c. TURQUIE

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EuGH, 18.06.2015 - C-583/13

  Deutsche Bahn u.a. / Kommission - Rechtsmittel - Wettbewerb - …

  Rn. 15 Sie rügt weiter, das Gericht habe sich in Rn. 66 des angefochtenen Urteils rechtsfehlerhaft auf die Urteile Harju/Finnland (vom 15. Februar 2011, Nr. 56716/09,) und Heino/Finnland (vom 15. Februar 2011, Nr. 56720/09) des EGMR berufen, soweit es dort festgestellt habe, aus diesen Urteilen lasse sich der allgemeine Grundsatz ableiten, dass das Fehlen einer vorherigen richterlichen Genehmigung durch eine umfassende Kontrolle im Anschluss an die Nachprüfung kompensiert werden könne.
• EuG, 06.09.2013 - T-289/11

  Deutsche Bahn u.a. / Kommission - Wettbewerb - Verwaltungsverfahren - Beschluss, …

  Rn. 66 Der EGMR hat in seiner jüngeren Rechtsprechung (Urteile vom 15. Februar 2011, Harju/Finnland, Beschwerde Nr. 56716/09, Randnrn. 40 und 44, sowie Heino/Finnland, Beschwerde Nr. 56715/09, Randnrn. 40 und 44) unterstrichen, wie wichtig es ist, die Garantien umso gründlicher zu prüfen, wenn Nachprüfungen ohne vorherige richterliche Genehmigung stattfinden können.
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 13.06.2014 - Gutachten 2/13

  Abschluss internationaler Übereinkünfte durch die Union - Beitritt der Union zur …

  {FN:80} - Vgl. beispielsweise EGMR, Urteil vom 7. Juni 2007, Smirnov/Russland (…Beschwerde-Nr. 71362/01, Recueil des arrêts et décisions 2007-VII, Rn. 45), sowie Urteile vom 15. Februar 2011, Harju/Finnland (Beschwerde-Nr. 56716/09, Rn. 40 und 44) und Heino/Finnland (…Beschwerde-Nr. 56720/09, Rn. 45).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 03.04.2014 - C-37/13

  Nexans und Nexans France / Kommission - Rechtsmittel - Wettbewerb - Verordnung …

  {FN:42} - EGMR, Urteil vom 7. Juni 2007, Smirnov/Russland (…Beschwerde-Nr. 71362/01, Recueil des arrêts et décisions 2007-VII, Rn. 45), sowie Urteile vom 15. Februar 2011, Harju/Finnland (Beschwerde-Nr. 56716/09, Rn. 40 und 44) und Heino/Finnland (…Beschwerde-Nr. 56720/09, Rn. 45).
• EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 23011/11

  LEHTO v. FINLAND

  "Whereas the efforts with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the case have been unsuccessful, the Government - referring to your Court's Harju v. Finland judgment of 15 February 2011 (no. 56716/09, esp. §§ 45 to 48 and 54) in a similar case - wishes to express by way of a unilateral declaration its acknowledgement that there has been a breach of the Convention in the present case for the same reasons and to the same extent as your Court has ruled in the Harju judgment.

  Rn. 12 The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Finland, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to respect for one's home and a lack of an effective remedy in that respect (see, for example, Harju v. Finland, no. 56716/09, §§ 43-45 and 54, 15 February 2011; and Heino v. Finland, no. 56720/09, §§ 44-46 and 55, 15 February 2011).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 12.02.2015 - C-583/13

  Deutsche Bahn u.a. / Kommission - Rechtsmittel - Art. 20 Abs. 4 und Art. 28 der …

  {FN:16} - Urteil Harju/Finnland, Nr. 56716/09, ECHR 2011.
• EGMR, 30.05.2017 - 32600/12

  TRABAJO RUEDA c. ESPAGNE

  Dans la présente affaire, il n'y avait aucun soupçon ni enquête préliminaire ou absence de poursuites pénales consécutives susceptibles de soulever des problèmes de nécessité ou d'arbitraire, ou en rapport avec une grande échelle de garanties procédurales (voir, par exemple, Heino c. Finlande, no 56720/09, 15 février 2011, ou Harju c. Finlande, no 56716/09, 15 février 2011).
• EGMR, 02.12.2014 - 3082/06

  [ENG]

  However, in situations where it has been impossible to obtain a prior judicial warrant there is a particular need for an effective and diligently conducted ex post factum judicial assessment of the lawfulness of, and justification for, the search warrant (see, for example, Harju v. Finland, no. 56716/09, § 44, 15 February 2011).
• EGMR, 19.03.2013 - 67120/09

  [ENG]

  Even though there is an effective domestic remedy to complain about seizure, that remedy is not effective in respect of search (see for example Harju v. Finland, no. 56716/09, 15 February 2011).