Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AL-DULIMI ET MONTANA MANAGEMENT INC. c. SUISSE

  Exception préliminaire rejetée (Article 35-3 - Ratione personae);Exception préliminaire rejetée (Article 35-3 - Ratione materiae);Violation de l'article 6 - Droit à un procès équitable (Article 6 - Procédure civile;Article 6-1 - Accès à un tribunal;Droits et ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AL-DULIMI AND MONTANA MANAGEMENT INC. v. SWITZERLAND

  Preliminary objection dismissed (Article 35-3 - Ratione personae);Preliminary objection dismissed (Article 35-3 - Ratione materiae);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court;Civil rights and ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AL-DULIMI AND MONTANA MANAGEMENT INC. v. SWITZERLAND - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  [DEU] Preliminary objection dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione personae;Preliminary objection dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Videoaufzeichnung der mündlichen Verhandlung)

  Al-Dulimi and Montana Management Inc. v. Switzerland

  [10.12.2014]

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [FRE]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 5809/08
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Zitiert selbst (71)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 30.06.2005 - 45036/98

  Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi ./. Irland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  As to the merits of the case, the Chamber examined the case in the light of the criterion of equivalent protection, as defined in the Court's settled case-law (see, in particular, Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland [GC], no. 45036/98, §§ 152-157, ECHR 2005-VI; M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, § 338, ECHR 2011; and Michaud v. France, no. 12323/11, §§ 102-104, ECHR 2012).

  The "equivalent protection" test was defined in the case of Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland ([GC], no. 45036/98, ECHR 2005-VI) and has been used in various cases since then (see, in particular, M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, § 338, ECHR 2011, and Michaud v. France, no. 12323/11, §§ 102-104, ECHR 2012).

  In order to reconcile this stance with the reality of international cooperation, the Court has held that State action taken in compliance with such international legal obligations is justified as long as the relevant organisation is considered to protect fundamental rights, both as regards the substantive guarantees offered and the mechanisms controlling their observance, in a manner which can be considered at least equivalent to the protection provided by the Convention (see, for example, M. & Co. v. the Federal Republic of Germany, no. 13258/87, Commission Decision of 9 February 1990, Decisions and Reports 64, p. 145; Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland [GC], no. 45036/98, §§ 152-155, ECHR 2005-VI ("Bosphorus"); Behrami and Behrami v. France and Saramati v. France, Germany and Norway (dec.) [GC], nos.

  See Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland [GC], no. 45036/98, ECHR 2005-VI ("Bosphorus").

• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  In this way, Article 6 § 1 embodies the "right to a court", of which the right of access, that is, the right to institute proceedings before courts in civil matters, constitutes one aspect only (see Cudak v. Lithuania [GC], no. 15869/02, § 54, ECHR 2010; Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 36, Series A no. 18; and Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein v. Germany [GC], no. 42527/98, § 43, ECHR 2001-VIII).

  At the same time, Article 6 of the Convention prescribed a right to a fair hearing which, according to the Court's jurisprudence, included "[t]he principle whereby a civil claim must be capable of being submitted to a judge" (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 35, Series A no. 18).

  Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 35, Series A no. 18.

• EGMR, 06.12.2012 - 12323/11

  [FRE]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  As to the merits of the case, the Chamber examined the case in the light of the criterion of equivalent protection, as defined in the Court's settled case-law (see, in particular, Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland [GC], no. 45036/98, §§ 152-157, ECHR 2005-VI; M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, § 338, ECHR 2011; and Michaud v. France, no. 12323/11, §§ 102-104, ECHR 2012).

  The "equivalent protection" test was defined in the case of Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland ([GC], no. 45036/98, ECHR 2005-VI) and has been used in various cases since then (see, in particular, M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, § 338, ECHR 2011, and Michaud v. France, no. 12323/11, §§ 102-104, ECHR 2012).

  71412/01 and 78166/01, § 145, 2 May 2007 ("Behrami"); and Michaud v. France, no. 12323/11, §§ 102-104, ECHR 2012).

• EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 71412/01

  A. B. und B. B. gegen Frankreich und der Individualbeschwerde Nr. 78166/01 von R. …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  71412/01 and 78166/01), but were measures implemented in domestic law, the arguments developed in that precedent concerning the nature of Security Council missions and the obligations arising therefrom for States should lead the Court to declare such measures attributable to the United Nations, and thus to consider that the applicants' complaints were incompatible ratione personae with the Convention.

  71412/01 and 78166/01, § 145, 2 May 2007 ("Behrami"); and Michaud v. France, no. 12323/11, §§ 102-104, ECHR 2012).

  71412/01 and 78166/01, § 122, 2 May 2007 ("Behrami")).

• EGMR, 11.06.2013 - 65542/12

  STICHTING MOTHERS OF SREBRENICA AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  The Court itself had recognised in its case-law that the immunity of the States and of the United Nations, respectively, could constitute a justified obstacle to access to the courts (the Government referred, in particular, to Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 35763/97, ECHR 2001-XI, and Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica and Others v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 65542/12, ECHR 2013).

  The same conclusion was reached in the case of Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica and Others v. the Netherlands ((dec.), no. 65542/12, § 154, ECHR 2013), where the Court held as follows:.

  Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica and Others v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 65542/12, 27 June 2013.

• EGMR, 21.09.1994 - 17101/90

  FAYED c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  In other words, the Court may not create by way of interpretation of Article 6 § 1 a substantive right which has no legal basis in the State concerned (see, for example, Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 65, Series A no. 294-B, and Roche v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 32555/96, § 119, ECHR 2005-X).

  It would not be consistent with the rule of law in a democratic society or with the basic principle underlying Article 6 § 1 - namely that civil claims must be capable of being submitted to a judge for adjudication - if a State could, without restraint or control by the Convention enforcement bodies, remove from the jurisdiction of the courts a whole range of civil claims or confer immunities from liability on categories of persons (see Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 65, Series A no. 294-B).

  Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, § 57, Series A no. 93, and Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 65, Series A no. 294-B.

• EGMR, 12.05.2009 - 10750/03

  GASPARINI c. ITALIE ET BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  It is true that in the case of Gasparini v. Italy and Belgium ((dec.), no. 10750/03, 12 May 2009), for example, the Court applied the equivalent protection test outside the EU context, the subject-matter there being the rights of NATO officials.

  Indeed, the Court has developed a presumption of equivalent protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms in favour of a number of international organisations, notably the EU, NATO and the UN (compare Michaud, cited above, §§ 102-104; Bosphorus, cited above, §§ 152-155; Gasparini v. Italy and Belgium (dec.), no. 10750/03, 12 May 2009; and Perez v. Germany (dec.), no. 15521/08, 6 January 2015).

  See, for example, Gasparini v. Italy and Belgium (dec.), no. 10750/03, 12 May 2009.

• EuGH, 03.09.2008 - C-402/05

  und Sicherheitspolitik - DER GERICHTSHOF ERKLÄRT DIE VERORDNUNG, MIT DER DIE …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  The case of Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities (joined cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P; hereinafter "Kadi I") concerned the freezing of the applicants' assets pursuant to European Community regulations adopted in connection with the implementation of Security Council resolutions 1267 (1999), 1333 (2000) and 1390 (2002), which, among other things, required all United Nations member States to take measures to freeze the funds and other financial resources of the individuals and entities identified by the Security Council's Sanctions Committee as being associated with Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda or the Taliban.

  On the teleological interpretation of Security Council Resolutions see Nada v. Switzerland [GC], no. 10593/08, § 175, ECHR 2012; Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities, joined cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P ("Kadi I"), Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities (CJEC), Grand Chamber, 3 September 2008, §§ 296-297; and ICTY Appeals Chamber in Dusko Tadić, cited above, §§ 72-78.

• EGMR, 23.03.1995 - 15318/89

  LOIZIDOU c. TURQUIE (EXCEPTIONS PRÉLIMINAIRES)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  The Court further observes that, the Convention being a constitutional instrument of European public order (see Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary objections), 23 March 1995, § 75, Series A no. 310, and Al-Skeini and Others, cited above, § 141), the States Parties are required, in that context, to ensure a level of scrutiny of Convention compliance which, at the very least, preserves the foundations of that public order.

  See Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary objections), 23 March 1995, § 75, Series A no. 310.

• EGMR, 18.02.1999 - 26083/94

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 5809/08

  Furthermore, a limitation of the right of access to a court, including jurisdictional immunity under international law, will not be compatible with Article 6 § 1 if it does not pursue a legitimate aim and if there is not a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be achieved (see Cudak, cited above, § 55; Waite and Kennedy v. Germany [GC], no. 26083/94, § 59, ECHR 1999-I; and Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica and Others, cited above, § 139).

  Waite and Kennedy v. Germany [GC], no. 26083/94, § 63, ECHR 1999-I.

• EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 42527/98

  Enteignung eines Gemäldes in Tschechien auf Grund der Benes-Dekrete - …
• EGMR, 09.09.2008 - 73250/01

  BOIVIN v. 34 MEMBER STATES OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE
• EGMR, 09.12.2008 - 73274/01

  CONNOLLY c. 15 ETATS MEMBRES DE L'UNION EUROPEENNE
• EGMR, 16.10.2007 - 36357/04

  BERIC AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
• EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 22617/07

  GALIC v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EuG, 21.09.2005 - T-315/01

  Kadi / Rat und Kommission - Gemeinsame Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik - …
• EuG, 21.09.2005 - T-306/01

  und Sicherheitspolitik - DAS GERICHT ERSTER INSTANZ ERLÄSST SEINE ERSTEN URTEILE …
• BVerfG, 22.10.1986 - 2 BvR 197/83

  Solange II
• EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 43509/08

  [FRE]
• EuGH, 28.06.2005 - C-189/02

  DER GERICHTSHOF BESTÄTIGT DIE URTEILE DES GERICHTS ERSTER INSTANZ ZUR EXISTENZ …
• EuGH, 23.04.1986 - 294/83

  Les Verts / Parlament
• EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 61603/00

  Konventionskonforme Auslegung des deutschen (Zivil-)Rechts …
• EuGH, 13.03.2007 - C-432/05

  Unibet - Grundsatz des gerichtlichen Rechtsschutzes - Nationale …
• EGMR, 16.09.2014 - 29750/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 22.12.2009 - 27996/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 27.02.1980 - 6903/75
• EGMR, 13.05.1980 - 6694/74
• EuGH, 21.11.1991 - C-269/90

  Technische Universität München / Hauptzollamt München-Mitte
• EuGH, 15.10.1987 - 222/86

  Unectef / Heylens
• EuGH, 22.11.2012 - C-277/11

  M. - Vorabentscheidungsersuchen - Gemeinsames europäisches Asylsystem - …
• EGMR, 19.10.2005 - 32555/96
• EuGH, 22.11.2007 - C-525/04

  Spanien / Lenzing - Rechtsmittel - Staatliche Beihilfen - Nichteintreibung von …
• EGMR, 20.09.2011 - 3989/07

  [FRE]
• EGMR, 22.11.1995 - 20166/92

  S.W. c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EKMR, 09.02.1990 - 13258/87

  M. & Co. v. the FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY
• EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78
• EGMR, 06.01.2015 - 415/07

  Klausecker gegen Deutschland
• EGMR, 19.04.1994 - 16034/90
• EuG, 12.12.2006 - T-228/02

  und Sicherheitspolitik - DAS GERICHT ERKLÄRT DEN BESCHLUSS DES RATES FÜR NICHTIG, …
• EGMR, 14.01.2014 - 34356/06

  Immunität gilt auch bei Folter
• EuG, 30.09.2010 - T-85/09

  Kadi / Kommission: Verordnung, mit der die Gelder von Yassin Abdullah Kadi …
• EuGH, 24.10.1996 - C-32/95

  Kommission / Lisrestal u.a.
• EGMR, 20.01.2009 - 13645/05

  Erwiderungsrecht auf Schlussanträge des Generalanwalts im …
• EuGH, 23.04.2013 - C-478/11

  und Sicherheitspolitik - Der Gerichtshof weist die Rechtsmittel zurück, die Herr …
• EGMR, 18.06.2013 - 3890/11

  POVSE v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 21.07.2011 - 32181/04

  [ENG]
• EuGH, 12.06.2014 - C-314/13

  Peftiev u.a. - Vorabentscheidungsersuchen - Gemeinsame Außen- und …
• EuGH, 13.03.2012 - C-376/10

  und Sicherheitspolitik - Sanktionen, die der Rat gegen ein Drittland erlassen …
• EGMR, 23.11.2010 - 60041/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 03.04.2012 - 37575/04

  Boulois v. Luxembourg
• EGMR, 28.09.1995 - 15346/89

  MASSON AND VAN ZON v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EuGH, 21.09.2000 - C-462/98

  Mediocurso / Kommission - "Rechtsmittel - Europäischer Sozialfonds - Berufliche …
• EGMR, 04.07.2013 - 11157/04

  ANCHUGOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 16.06.2009 - 40382/04

  R. INC. ./. Deutschland
• EGMR, 09.10.2012 - 33917/12

  DJOKABA LAMBI LONGA v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 47273/99

  BELES AND OTHERS v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
• EGMR, 06.01.2015 - 15521/08

  Perez gegen Deutschland: Innerstaatlicher Rechtsweg nicht erschöpft
• EGMR, 26.04.2007 - 71525/01

  DUMITRU POPESCU c. ROUMANIE (N° 2)
• EGMR, 02.11.2010 - 37586/06

  [ENG]
• EuG, 11.06.2014 - T-293/12

  Das Gericht erklärt die Aufnahme der Syria International Islamic Bank in die …
• EuG, 04.06.2014 - T-67/12

  Sina Bank gegen Rat der Europäischen Union.
• EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 49032/07

  BLAGOJEVIC v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EKMR, 09.09.1998 - 38817/97

  LENZING AG c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 08.03.2012 - 49037/06

  CHAUDET CONTRE LA FRANCE
• EuG, 04.06.2014 - T-66/12

  Ali Sedghi und Ahmad Azizi gegen Rat der Europäischen Union.
• EuG, 04.06.2014 - T-68/12

  Abdolnaser Hemmati gegen Rat der Europäischen Union.
• EGMR, 31.03.2015 - 28827/11

  ANDREASEN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM AND 26 OTHER MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
• EGMR, 16.06.2009 - 36099/06

  BEYGO c. 46 ETATS MEMBRES DU CONSEIL DE L'EUROPE
• EGMR, 07.07.2009 - 18754/06

  LOPEZ CIFUENTES c. ESPAGNE
• EKMR, 09.09.1998 - 39025/97

  LENZING AG v. GERMANY
• EuG, 12.07.2006 - T-253/02

  und Sicherheitspolitik - DAS GERICHT MACHT WEITERE DARLEGUNGEN ZU DEN RECHTEN DER …

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 13.02.2025 - C-605/23

  Ati-19 - Vorlage zur Vorabentscheidung - Gemeinsames Mehrwertsteuersystem - …

  {FN:35} EGMR, 21. Juni 2016, Al-Dulimi und Montana Management Inc./Schweiz (CE:ECHR:2016:0621JUD000580908, § 130).

  {FN:38} EGMR, 21. Juni 2016, Al-Dulimi und Montana Management Inc./Schweiz (CE:ECHR:2016:0621JUD000580908, §§ 128 bis 130).

  {FN:43} EGMR, 21. Juni 2016, Al-Dulimi und Montana Management Inc./Schweiz (CE:ECHR:2016:0621JUD000580908, § 129).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 11.02.2021 - C-579/19

  Food Standards Agency

  {FN:79} Vgl. Urteil des EGMR vom 21. Juni 2016, Al-Dulimi und Montana Management Inc./Schweiz (CE:ECHR:2016:0621JUD000580908, Nr. 130).