Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MÜLLER c. AUTRICHE

  Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1, Art. 14, Art. 13 MRK
  Partiellement irrecevable partiellement recevable (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MÜLLER v. AUSTRIA

  Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1, Art. 14, Art. 13 MRK
  Partly inadmissible partly admissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (37)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 53080/13

  BÉLÁNÉ NAGY v. HUNGARY

  The payment of contributions to a pension fund may in certain circumstances create a property right in a portion of such a fund and a modification of the pension rights under such a system could therefore in principle raise an issue under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1; even if it is assumed that Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 guarantees to persons who have paid contributions to a special insurance system the right to derive benefit from the system, it cannot be interpreted as entitling that person to a pension of a particular amount (see Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, DR 3, p. 25, § 30, quoted in T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229, at p. 232).

  In this respect, the fact that a person has entered into and forms part of a State social-security system (even a compulsory one) does not necessarily mean that that system cannot be changed either as to the conditions of eligibility of payment or as to the quantum of the benefit or pension (see Richardson, cited above, § 17, and Damjanac v. Croatia, no. 52943/10, § 86, 24 October 2013; see also Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, DR 3, p. 25, §§ 30-31; Skorkiewicz v. Poland (dec.), no. 39860/98, 1 June 1999; and Kjartan Ásmundsson, cited above, § 39).

• EGMR, 02.02.2006 - 51466/99

  Menschenrechte: Änderung in der Ruhegeldversorgung keine Diskriminierung i.S. der …

  Der Gerichtshof erinnert ebenfalls daran, dass diese Bestimmung die Staaten nicht daran hindert, mehrere Renten zu kombinieren, um eine Kumulierung der Sozialleistungen zu vermeiden ( Blanco Callejas ./. Spanien (Entsch.), Nr. 64100/00, 18. Juni 2002, Quiles Gonzalez ./. Spanien (Entsch.), Nr. 71752/01, 14. Januar 2003, Müller ./. Österreich , Nr. 5849/72, Bericht der Kommission vom 1. Oktober 1975, DR 3, S. 25, Urbaniak ./. Frankreich , Nr. 36197/97, Entscheidung der Kommission vom 16. April 1998, Kuhlmann ./. Deutschland , Nr. 21519/93, Entscheidung der Kommission vom 30. Juni 1993, Beging ./. Deutschland , Nr. 15376/89, Entscheidung der Kommission vom 27. Mai 1991, und vorerwähnte Sache Stigson ).
• EKMR, 16.04.1998 - 28356/95

  STYK v. POLAND

  5849/72, Dec.

  that person to a pension of a particular amount (5849/72, Müller v.

• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 28707/95

  A.S. v. POLAND

  5849/72, Dec.

  amount (5849/72, Müller v. Austria, Comm.

• EKMR, 16.04.1998 - 33770/96

  PARUSZEWSKA v. POLAND

  5849/72, Dec.

  amount (5849/72, Müller v. Austria, Comm.

• EGMR, 10.02.2015 - 53080/13

  BÉLÁNÉ NAGY v. HUNGARY

  Therefore, the applicant did not, at any given moment, have an identifiable and claimable share in a particular fund for the purposes of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, or so-called "purchased rights" within the meaning of the Convention (see, for example, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission decision of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; G v. Austria, no. 10094/82, Commission decision of 14 May 1984, DR 38, p. 84; and De Kleine Staarman v. the Netherlands, no. 10503/83, Commission decision of 16 May 1985, DR 42, p. 162).
• EGMR, 12.10.2000 - 43440/98
  The Court recalls, however, that even though the rights stemming from the payment of contributions to the social insurance system, in particular the right to derive benefits from such a system - for instance in the form of a pension - can be asserted under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, this provision cannot be interpreted as giving an individual a right to a pension of a particular amount (Eur. Comm. HR, no. 5849/72, Müller v. Austria Comm. Report, 1.10.1975, D.R. 3, p. 25; no. 10671/83, Dec. 4.3.1985, D.R. 42, p. 229; Storkiewicz v. Poland (dec.), no 39860/98, ECHR 1999, and Domalewski v. Poland, cited above).
• EGMR, 25.10.2011 - 2033/04

  VALKOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, among other authorities, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Kuna v. Germany (dec.), no. 52449/99, ECHR 2001-V (extracts); Lenz v. Germany (dec.), no. 40862/98, ECHR 2001-X; Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, § 36, 22 October 2009; Wieczorek v. Poland, no. 18176/05, § 57, 8 December 2009; Poulain v. France (dec.), no. 52273/08, 8 February 2011; and Maggio and Others, cited above, § 55).
• EGMR, 13.03.2025 - 27313/21

  CALVEZ c. FRANCE

  Rn. 79 La Cour rappelle que l'article 13 exige l'effectivité d'un recours, et non pas une multitude de recours effectifs et encore moins un troisième degré de juridiction (Müller c. Autriche, no 5849/72, décision de la Commission, 16 décembre 1974, et, plus récemment, mutatis mutandis, A.M. c. Pays-Bas, no 29094/09, § 70, 5 juillet 2016).
• EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 31925/08

  [ENG]

  Nor does it guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount (see, among other authorities, Müller v. Austria, no. 5849/72, Commission's report of 1 October 1975, Decisions and Reports (DR) 3, p. 25; T. v. Sweden, no. 10671/83, Commission decision of 4 March 1985, DR 42, p. 229; Jankovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 43440/98, ECHR 2000-X; Kuna v. Germany (dec.), no. 52449/99, ECHR 2001-V (extracts); Lenz v. Germany (dec.), no. 40862/98, ECHR 2001-X; Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004-IX; Apostolakis v. Greece, no. 39574/07, § 36, 22 October 2009; Wieczorek v. Poland, no. 18176/05, § 57, 8 December 2009; Poulain v. France (dec.), no. 52273/08, 8 February 2011; and Maggio and Others v. Italy, nos.
• EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 27458/06

  LAKICEVIC AND OTHERS v. MONTENEGRO AND SERBIA
• EGMR, 15.06.1999 - 34610/97

  DOMALEWSKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 01.06.1999 - 39860/98

  SKORKIEWICZ v. POLAND
• EGMR, 15.03.2001 - 30517/96

  AUNOLA v. FINLAND
• EGMR, 10.04.2018 - 20006/08

  ÜSTÜNER c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 09.10.2003 - 15085/02

  CEKIC and OTHERS v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 12.12.2000 - 45424/99

  TRUHLI v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 40210/09

  SAHIN v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 08.12.2005 - 13898/02

  DUMANOVSKI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
• EGMR, 03.09.2002 - 67603/01

  CONTAL contre la FRANCE
• EGMR, 21.06.2001 - 59498/00

  BOURDOV contre la RUSSIE
• EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 43806/19

  DOGAN v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 18.06.2002 - 64100/00

  BLANCO CALLEJAS contre l'ESPAGNE
• EGMR, 23.03.2000 - 33945/96

  J.S. AND OTHERS v. POLAND
• EGMR, 29.06.1999 - 23161/94

  OKAY contre la TURQUIE
• EGMR, 08.12.1998 - 38695/97

  GARCÍA MANIBARDO contre l'ESPAGNE
• EKMR, 23.10.1997 - 27004/95

  SZRABJET AND CLARKE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 01.04.1992 - 15379/89

  Z. v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 05.03.1986 - 10821/84

  GUEBAOLI contre la FRANCE
• EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 66907/01

  DOCEVSKI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 51290/99

  DEMOKRATIK KITLE PARTISI ET ELCI c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 01.10.2002 - 49151/99

  GASCON MORENO contre l'ESPAGNE
• EKMR, 05.05.1988 - 12446/86

  ALSTERLUND v. SWEDEN
• EGMR, 02.03.2006 - 38139/05

  MAMONOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 07.12.2000 - 50115/99

  LAZAREVIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 10.02.2000 - 47711/99

  STAWICKI v. POLAND
• EKMR, 09.09.1998 - 38696/97

  COKE AND 21 OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM