Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  EKIMDZHIEV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 34) Individual applications;(Art. 34) Victim;Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Violation of Article 8 - Right ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  EKIMDZHIEV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Art. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (39)Zitiert selbst (39)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 07.11.2017 - 37717/05

  Die Kommunikation mit dem Verteidiger darf nicht abgehört werden, egal wann

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  This is of particular relevance as the contemporaneous provision of reasons is a vital safeguard against abusive surveillance (see Dragojevic v. Croatia, no. 68955/11, §§ 88-101, 15 January 2015; Dudchenko v. Russia, no. 37717/05, §§ 97-98, 7 November 2017; and Liblik and Others v. Estonia, nos. 173/15 and 5 others, §§ 137-41, 28 May 2019).

  Nor does the instruction lay down enough safeguards with respect to materials obtained as a result of accidentally intercepted lawyer-client communications (see, mutatis mutandis, R.E. v. the United Kingdom, no. 62498/11, §§ 138-41, 27 October 2015, and Dudchenko v. Russia, no. 37717/05, § 107, 7 November 2017).

• EuGH, 21.12.2016 - C-203/15

  Die Mitgliedstaaten dürfen den Betreibern elektronischer Kommunikationsdienste …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  CJEU CASE-LAW ON ARTICLE 15 § 1 OF THE E-PRIVACY DIRECTIVE 240. In a judgment of 21 December 2016 (Tele2 Sverige and Watson and Others, C-203/15 and C-698/15, EU:C:2016:970), given pursuant to preliminary references by the Administrative Court of Appeal of Stockholm, Sweden, and the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, the CJEU held that national legislation providing for the general retention of all traffic and location data for the purpose of fighting crime was impermissible under Article 15 § 1 of the E-Privacy Directive (see paragraph 230 above).
• EuGH, 08.04.2014 - C-293/12

  Der Gerichtshof erklärt die Richtlinie über die Vorratsspeicherung von Daten für …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  In a judgment of 8 April 2014, Digital Rights Ireland and Others (C-293/12 and C-594/12, EU:C:2014:238) the CJEU held that Directive invalid as a whole, on the basis that it required a disproportionate interference with the rights to respect for private life and communications, protected under Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and with the right to right to protection of personal data under Article 8 of the Charter.

• EuGH, 06.10.2020 - C-511/18

  La Quadrature du Net u.a. - Vorratsdatenspeicherung kann zulässig sein

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  In a judgment of 6 October 2020 (La Quadrature du Net and Others, C-511/18, C-512/18 and C-520/18, EU:C:2020:791), given pursuant to preliminary references by the French Council of State and the Belgian Constitutional Court, the CJEU, among other things, confirmed its position in Tele2 Sverige and Watson and Others (see paragraph 240 above) that Article 15 § 1 of the E-Privacy Directive precluded the general retention of traffic and location data for the purpose of fighting serious crime, and held that this provision permitted solely a targeted retention of such data, limited on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory factors.
• EuGH, 06.10.2020 - C-623/17

  Datenschutz: Vorratsdatenspeicherung nicht zulässig, aber ...

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  In another judgment of 6 October 2020 (Privacy International, C-623/17, EU:C:2020:790), given pursuant to a preliminary reference by the United Kingdom's Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the CJEU held, among other things, that Article 15 § 1 of the E-Privacy Directive precluded legislation enabling an authority to require communications service providers to carry out a general transmission of traffic and location data to the security and intelligence agencies for the purpose of safeguarding national security.
• EGMR, 06.09.1978 - 5029/71

  Klass u.a. ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  As already noted in paragraph 267 above, the National Bureau must notify someone who has been placed under secret surveillance only if that has happened unlawfully, whereas under the Court's case-law such notification is, in the absence of a remedy available without prior notification, required in all cases, as soon as it can be made without jeopardising the purpose of the surveillance (see Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, § 58, Series A no. 28; Weber and Saravia v. Germany (dec.), no. 54934/00, § 135, ECHR 2006-XI; and, more recently, Roman Zakharov, cited above, § 287).
• EGMR, 04.12.2015 - 47143/06

  EGMR verurteilt Russland wegen geheimer Telefonüberwachung

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  In the light of the Court's case-law (see Roman Zakharov v. Russia [GC], no. 47143/06, § 307, ECHR 2015), the complaint falls to be examined solely under Article 8 of the Convention, which provides, so far as relevant:.
• EGMR, 30.01.2020 - 50001/12

  Breyer ./. Deutschland - Identifizierungspflicht bei Prepaid-SIM-Kauf verletzt …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  It is settled that the mere storing of data relating to someone's private life amounts to interference with that individual's right to respect for his or her "private life" (see, with respect to personal data relating to the use of communications services, Breyer v. Germany, no. 50001/12, § 81, 30 January 2020; Centrum för rättvisa, cited above, § 244, and Big Brother Watch and Others, cited above, § 330).
• EuGH, 02.03.2021 - C-746/18

  Grenzen für Vorratsdatenspeicherung

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  In a judgment of 2 March 2021 (Prokuratuur, C-746/18, EU:C:2021:152), given pursuant to a preliminary reference by the Supreme Court of Estonia, the CJEU reiterated that Article 15 § 1 of the E-Privacy Directive permitted access to retained traffic or location data for the purpose of fighting crime only when it came to serious crime or serious threats to public security, regardless of the length of the period in respect of which access was sought and the quantity or nature of the data available in respect of that period.
• EGMR, 29.06.2006 - 54934/00

  Menschenrechte: Verletzung der Privatsphäre und des Briefgeheimnisses durch das …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2022 - 70078/12

  As already noted in paragraph 267 above, the National Bureau must notify someone who has been placed under secret surveillance only if that has happened unlawfully, whereas under the Court's case-law such notification is, in the absence of a remedy available without prior notification, required in all cases, as soon as it can be made without jeopardising the purpose of the surveillance (see Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, § 58, Series A no. 28; Weber and Saravia v. Germany (dec.), no. 54934/00, § 135, ECHR 2006-XI; and, more recently, Roman Zakharov, cited above, § 287).
• EuGH, 02.10.2018 - C-207/16

  Zugang zu Telekommunikationsdaten auch bei Diebstahlsverdacht vom SIM-Karten
• EGMR, 02.08.1984 - 8691/79
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72
• EGMR, 22.05.1990 - 12726/87
• EuGH, 01.02.2016 - C-698/15

  Davis u.a.
• EGMR, 04.10.2007 - 32772/02

  Verein gegen Tierfabriken Schweiz (VGT) ./. Schweiz
• EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 19867/12

  FONTES MOREIRA FERREIRA c. PORTUGAL
• EGMR, 28.03.1990 - 10890/84
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 15.01.2020 - C-520/18

  Ordre des barreaux francophones und germanophone u.a. - Vorlage zur …
• EGMR, 05.02.2015 - 22251/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.07.2017 - 71537/14

  HARKINS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 68955/11

  DRAGOJEVIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 28.06.2007 - 62540/00

  ASSOCIATION FOR EUROPEAN INTEGRATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND EKIMDZHIEV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.05.2020 - 2309/10

  RINGLER v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 08.02.2018 - 31446/12

  BEN FAIZA c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 13.07.2021 - 50705/11

  TODOROV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 10.04.2008 - 21071/05

  WASSERMAN v. RUSSIA (No. 2)
• EGMR, 15.11.2011 - 23687/05

  IVANTOC AND OTHERS v. MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA
• EGMR - 30268/23 (anhängig)

  BALCAL v. TÜRKİYE and 27 other applications
• EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 173/15

  LIBLIK v. ESTONIA and 5 other applications
• EGMR, 30.03.2021 - 37801/16

  RIBCHEVA v. BULGARIA and 2 other applications
• EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 29157/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 29.09.2020 - 3599/10

  TRETTER AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 07.11.2017 - 59589/10

  MOSKALEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.04.2003 - 53470/99

  MEHEMI c. FRANCE (N° 2)
• EGMR, 15.11.2018 - 19421/15

  v.D. v. CROATIA (NO. 2)
• EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 53626/14

  HARIZANOV c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 18.07.2017 - 27473/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR - 34584/18 (anhängig)

  GATEV v. BULGARIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 24.09.2024 - 44715/20

  A.L. und E.J. ./. Frankreich - Encrochat-Menschenrechtsbeschwerde unzulässig …

  Ainsi, même en prenant en compte le risque de surveillance indirecte (Ekimdzhiev et autres c. Bulgarie, no 70078/12, § 263, 11 janvier 2022), la Cour constate que la mesure de captation ne pouvait donc concerner qu'un cercle de personnes déterminé, limité aux utilisateurs d'EncroChat, et non pas l'ensemble des usagers des services de communication téléphonique ou d'Internet (comparer avec Roman Zakharov, précité, § 175 et Centrum för rättvisa, précité, §§ 169-170).
• EuGH, 16.02.2023 - C-349/21

  Eine Entscheidung zur Genehmigung der Telefonüberwachung muss keine …

  Der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte hat allerdings in Bezug auf zwei Urteile des Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Spezialisiertes Strafgericht) anerkannt, dass das Fehlen individualisierter Gründe nicht automatisch zu der Schlussfolgerung führen kann, der die Genehmigung erteilende Richter habe den Antrag nicht ordnungsgemäß geprüft (vgl. in diesem Sinne EGMR, Urteil vom 11. Januar 2022, Ekimdzhiev u. a./Bulgarien, CE:ECHR:2022:0111JUD007007812, §§ 313 und 314 sowie die dort angeführte Rechtsprechung).
• EGMR, 01.04.2025 - 2799/16

  SHIPS WASTE OIL COLLECTOR B.V. ET AUTRES c. PAYS-BAS

  In particular, the business premises of legal persons are covered by the notion of "home" under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention (see, among others, Société Canal Plus and Others v. France, no. 29408/08, § 52, 21 December 2010; Société Colas Est and Others v. France, no. 37971/97, §§ 41-42, ECHR 2002-III; Saint-Paul Luxembourg S.A. v. Luxembourg, no. 26419/10, §§ 37 and 39, 18 April 2013; and UAB Kesko Senukai Lithuania v. Lithuania, no. 19162/19, §§ 109-10, 4 April 2023), and the communications of legal persons are covered by the notion of "correspondence" under that Article (see, for example, in the context of secret-surveillance activities, Association for European Integration and Human Rights and Ekimdzhiev v. Bulgaria, no. 62540/00, § 60, 28 June 2007; Liblik and Others v. Estonia, nos. 173/15 and 5 others, § 110, 28 May 2019; and Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, § 374, 11 January 2022).

  Rn. 14 The Court has held in the context of the interception of communications that the contemporaneous provision of reasons is a vital safeguard against arbitrariness and abuse because it ensures that the authorising authority has properly reviewed the necessity and proportionality of the interference with Article 8 rights (see Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, § 313, 11 January 2022).

• EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 33696/19

  PODCHASOV v. RUSSIA

  Rn. 52 The Court finds that the storage by the applicant's ICO of the contents of all his Internet communications and related communications data interfered with his right to respect for his private life and correspondence (see paragraph 19 above for the domestic provisions; compare Breyer v. Germany, no. 50001/12, § 81, 30 January 2020, and Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, §§ 372 and 373, 11 January 2022).
• EGMR, 15.02.2024 - 19920/20

  SKOBERNE v. SLOVENIA

  Rn. 73 In respect of the General Data Protection Directive and the Law-Enforcement Directive, see Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, §§ 234-39, 11 January 2022.

  The Court has already established that subscriber, traffic and location data can relate - alone or in combination - to the "private life" of those concerned (see Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, § 372, 11 January 2022).

• EuGH, 13.06.2024 - C-229/23

  HYA u. a. II - Vorlage zur Vorabentscheidung - Telekommunikationssektor - …

  a. I entwickelt habe, unangewendet zu bleiben hat, obwohl dieses Urteil im Widerspruch nicht nur zur früheren Rechtsprechung des Gerichtshofs, wie sie sich insbesondere aus dem Urteil vom 2. März 2021, Prokuratuur (Voraussetzungen für den Zugang zu Daten über die elektronische Kommunikation) (C-746/18, EU:C:2021:152), ergebe, sondern auch zur Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte, wie sie sich aus dem Urteil vom 11. Januar 2022, Ekimdzhiev u. a./Bulgarien (CE:ECHR:2022:0111JUD007007812), ergebe, zu stehen scheine.

  - nationale Rechtsvorschriften (Art. 121 Abs. 4 der Verfassung, Art. 174 Abs. 4 NPK und Art. 15 Abs. 2 ZSRS) sowie die Auslegung von Art. 8 Abs. 2 EMRK durch den EGMR (im Urteil vom 11. Januar 2022, Ekimdzhiev u. a./Bulgarien [CE:ECHR:2022:0111JUD007007812]), nach denen die ausdrückliche Angabe von schriftlichen Gründen in der gerichtlichen Genehmigung (zum Mithören, Abhören und Speichern von Telekommunikation ohne die Einwilligung der Nutzer) erforderlich ist, und zwar ungeachtet des Vorliegens eines begründeten Antrags, auf dessen Grundlage die Genehmigung erteilt wurde, unangewendet zu lassen, wobei der Grund für die Nichtanwendung darin liegt, dass sich, wenn man den Antrag und die Genehmigung nebeneinander liest, feststellen lässt, 1) aus welchen genauen Gründen das Gericht unter den tatsächlichen und rechtlichen Umständen des konkreten Falls zu der Auffassung gelangt ist, dass die gesetzlichen Anforderungen erfüllt seien, und 2) in Bezug auf welche Person und welches Kommunikationsmittel die gerichtliche Genehmigung erteilt wurde;.

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 13.10.2022 - C-349/21

  HYA u.a. (Motivation des autorisations des écoutes téléphoniques) - Vorlage zur …

  {FN:16} EGMR, 11. Januar 2022, Ekimdzhiev u. a./Bulgarien (CE:ECHR:2022:0111JUD007007812).

  {FN:17} EGMR, 11. Januar 2022, Ekimdzhiev u. a./Bulgarien (CE:ECHR:2022:0111JUD007007812, §§ 313 bis 321).

• EGMR, 04.03.2025 - 4326/18

  GIRGINOVA v. BULGARIA

  The heads of unit were accused of failing to (a) protect classified information, (b) manage the use of covert surveillance equipment, and (c) ensure that "special means of surveillance" (for a definition of that term in Bulgarian law, see Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, § 11, 11 January 2022) would only be used lawfully - all of which was alleged to have amounted to aggravated misconduct in public office by a person subject to military law, contrary to Article 387 §§ 1 and 2 of the Code.

  The reasons for the acquittal of a former Minister of Internal Affairs charged with failing to supervise the misuse of covert surveillance equipment by his subordinates were of considerable public interest - especially since there were recurrent scandals relating to the misuse of "special means of surveillance" in Bulgaria at the time (see Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, § 357, 11 January 2022).

• EGMR, 17.02.2026 - 6580/22

  GREEN ALLIANCE v. BULGARIA

  Some sort of supervisory mechanism similar to that provided by law in respect of "special means of surveillance" (for the definition of that term in Bulgarian law, see Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, § 11, 11 January 2022; see also paragraphs 73-74 below) was indispensable.

  In the light of the Court's case-law in relation to matters of the kind in issue in the present case (see Roman Zakharov v. Russia [GC], no. 47143/06, § 307, ECHR 2015; Centrum för rättvisa v. Sweden [GC], no. 35252/08, § 377, 25 May 2021; Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, § 247, 11 January 2022; and Pietrzak and Bychawska-Siniarska and Others v. Poland, nos.

• EGMR, 16.04.2024 - 40519/15

  TONCHEV v. BULGARIA

  120. Moreover, the application of the relevant data protection rules in Bulgaria to criminal record data appears to throw up novel issues with which the Bulgarian authorities are yet to fully grapple, especially since the overhaul of that branch of Bulgarian law following the entry into force of the GDPR and the transposition of the LED (see, mutatis mutandis, Ekimdzhiev and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 70078/12, § 275, 11 January 2022).
• EGMR, 28.04.2026 - 45864/22

  KANEV AND BULGARIAN HELSINKI COMMITTEE v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 23.05.2024 - 2507/19

  CONTRADA c. ITALIE
• EGMR - 15889/23 (anhängig)

  NEDELCHEV AND TSARIGRADSKA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 06.02.2025 - 36617/18

  ITALGOMME PNEUMATICI S.R.L. v. ITALY and 12 other applications
• EGMR, 18.12.2025 - 37514/20

  CERNÝ v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
• EGMR, 13.02.2025 - 22790/19

  DENYSYUK v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 30.01.2024 - 53050/21

  ZLATANOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 25.08.2026 - 1991/21
• EGMR, 08.01.2026 - 40607/19

  FERRIERI v. ITALY and 2 other applications
• EGMR, 13.02.2025 - 51409/19

  MACHARIK v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
• EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 46564/15

  KORPORATIVNA TARGOVSKA BANKA AD v. BULGARIA + 1 other application
• EGMR, 14.06.2022 - 56070/18

  STOYANOVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 43467/06

  AKHUNDOV v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 05.11.2024 - 25578/11

  CASARINI v. ITALY
• EGMR, 09.09.2025 - 24729/17

  ILAREVA ET AUTRES c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 18.02.2025 - 33067/22

  ROMANCHENKO v. GEORGIA
• EGMR - 26487/23 (anhängig)

  KORIDZE v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 03.02.2026 - 15147/23

  SZELÉNYI v. HUNGARY
• EGMR, 06.06.2023 - 8243/15

  PARTI POLITIQUE 'PATRIA' c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 23.03.2023 - 30005/13

  STOYANOV AND TABAKOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR - 8032/25 (anhängig)

  GESELLSCHAFT FÜR FREIHEITSRECHTE E.V. v. GERMANY and 2 other applications
• EGMR - 3699/20 (anhängig)

  FASANO v. ITALY
• EGMR - 53268/22 (anhängig)

  BOULHEL c. FRANCE et 1 autre affaire
• EGMR, 16.01.2024 - 27237/19

  KYIVSTAR, PAT v. UKRAINE
• EGMR - 50055/21 (anhängig)

  SCADUTO v. ITALY and 2 applications
• EGMR - 7524/25 (anhängig)

  REPORTERS SANS FRONTIÈRES v. GERMANY and 4 other applications
• EGMR, 23.03.2023 - 73086/12

  GEORGIEV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR - 27284/25 (anhängig)

  REPORTER OHNE GRENZEN E.v. v. GERMANY
• EGMR - 2350/26 (anhängig)

  S.B.Y. v. GERMANY and 5 other applications