Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VELIKOVI AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  No violation of P1-1 for some applicants Violation of P1-1 for the others No violation of Art. 6 (one applicant) Not necessary to examine Arts.13 and 14 Just satisfaction partially reserved Costs and expenses partial award (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 43278/98
• EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98, 45437/99, 48380/99, 48014/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, 194/02
• EGMR, 01.02.2017 - 43278/98

Wird zitiert von ... (110)Zitiert selbst (16)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 24.04.2008 - 48380/99

  TODOROVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  (Applications nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02).

  The case originated in nine applications against the Republic of Bulgaria lodged by Bulgarian nationals under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") as follows: application no. 43278/98, Velikovi, on 10 April 1998[1]; application no. 45437/99, Wulpe, on 11 December 1998; application no. 48014/99, Cholakovi, on 12 March 1999; application no. 48380/99, Todorova, on 4 February 1999; application no. 51362/99, Eneva and Dobrev, on 13 May 1999, application no. 53367/99, Stoyanova and Ivanov, on 2 November 1999; application no. 60036/00, Bogdanovi, on 4 January 2000; application no. 73465/01, Tzilevi, on 11 May 2001; and application no. 194/02, Nikolovi, on 29 September 2001.

  The applicants in all cases with the exception of Eneva and Dobrev (no. 51362/99) and Tzilevi (no. 73465/01) were granted legal aid.

  The case of Bogdanovi (application no. 60036/00).

  The case of Tzilevi (application no. 73465/01).

  Holds that there has been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the applications of Todorova (application no. 48380/99), Eneva and Dobrev (no. 51362/99), Bogdanovi (no. 60036/00) and Tzilevi (no. 73465/01);.

  Holds that the question of the application of Article 41, which arises in respect of the applications of Todorova (application no. 48380/99), Eneva and Dobrev (no. 51362/99), Bogdanovi (no. 60036/00) and Tzilevi (no. 73465/01), is not ready for decision in so far as it concerns the claims in respect of damage;.

  (c) reserves the further procedure in the applications of Todorova (application no. 48380/99), Eneva and Dobrev (no. 51362/99), Bogdanovi (no. 60036/00) and Tzilevi (no. 73465/01) and delegates to the President of the Chamber the power to fix the same if need be.

  (iii) in the case of Bogdanovi (application no. 60036/00) - EUR 2, 000 (two thousand euros);.

  (iv) in the case of Tzilevi (application no. 73465/01) - EUR 2, 500 (two thousand five hundred euros);.

• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 51362/99

  ENEVA AND DOBREV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  (Applications nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02).

  The case originated in nine applications against the Republic of Bulgaria lodged by Bulgarian nationals under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") as follows: application no. 43278/98, Velikovi, on 10 April 1998[1]; application no. 45437/99, Wulpe, on 11 December 1998; application no. 48014/99, Cholakovi, on 12 March 1999; application no. 48380/99, Todorova, on 4 February 1999; application no. 51362/99, Eneva and Dobrev, on 13 May 1999, application no. 53367/99, Stoyanova and Ivanov, on 2 November 1999; application no. 60036/00, Bogdanovi, on 4 January 2000; application no. 73465/01, Tzilevi, on 11 May 2001; and application no. 194/02, Nikolovi, on 29 September 2001.

  The applicants in all cases with the exception of Eneva and Dobrev (no. 51362/99) and Tzilevi (no. 73465/01) were granted legal aid.

  The case of Eneva and Dobrev (application no. 51362/99).

  Holds that there has been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the applications of Todorova (application no. 48380/99), Eneva and Dobrev (no. 51362/99), Bogdanovi (no. 60036/00) and Tzilevi (no. 73465/01);.

  Holds that the question of the application of Article 41, which arises in respect of the applications of Todorova (application no. 48380/99), Eneva and Dobrev (no. 51362/99), Bogdanovi (no. 60036/00) and Tzilevi (no. 73465/01), is not ready for decision in so far as it concerns the claims in respect of damage;.

  (c) reserves the further procedure in the applications of Todorova (application no. 48380/99), Eneva and Dobrev (no. 51362/99), Bogdanovi (no. 60036/00) and Tzilevi (no. 73465/01) and delegates to the President of the Chamber the power to fix the same if need be.

  (ii) in the case of Eneva and Dobrev (application no. 51362/99) - EUR 1, 500 (one thousand five hundred euros);.

• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 194/02

  NIKOLOVI v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  (Applications nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02).

  The case originated in nine applications against the Republic of Bulgaria lodged by Bulgarian nationals under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") as follows: application no. 43278/98, Velikovi, on 10 April 1998[1]; application no. 45437/99, Wulpe, on 11 December 1998; application no. 48014/99, Cholakovi, on 12 March 1999; application no. 48380/99, Todorova, on 4 February 1999; application no. 51362/99, Eneva and Dobrev, on 13 May 1999, application no. 53367/99, Stoyanova and Ivanov, on 2 November 1999; application no. 60036/00, Bogdanovi, on 4 January 2000; application no. 73465/01, Tzilevi, on 11 May 2001; and application no. 194/02, Nikolovi, on 29 September 2001.

  The case of Nikolovi (application no. 194/02).

  Holds that there has been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the applications of Velikovi (application no. 43278/98), Wulpe (no. 45437/99), Cholakovi (no. 48014/99), Stoyanova and Ivanov (no. 53367/99) and Nikolovi (no. 194/02);.

  Holds that there has been no violation of Article 6 of the Convention in the application of Nikolovi (no. 194/02);.

• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 53367/99

  STOYANOVA AND IVANOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  (Applications nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02).

  The case originated in nine applications against the Republic of Bulgaria lodged by Bulgarian nationals under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") as follows: application no. 43278/98, Velikovi, on 10 April 1998[1]; application no. 45437/99, Wulpe, on 11 December 1998; application no. 48014/99, Cholakovi, on 12 March 1999; application no. 48380/99, Todorova, on 4 February 1999; application no. 51362/99, Eneva and Dobrev, on 13 May 1999, application no. 53367/99, Stoyanova and Ivanov, on 2 November 1999; application no. 60036/00, Bogdanovi, on 4 January 2000; application no. 73465/01, Tzilevi, on 11 May 2001; and application no. 194/02, Nikolovi, on 29 September 2001.

  The case of Stoyanova and Ivanov (application no. 53367/99).

  Holds that there has been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the applications of Velikovi (application no. 43278/98), Wulpe (no. 45437/99), Cholakovi (no. 48014/99), Stoyanova and Ivanov (no. 53367/99) and Nikolovi (no. 194/02);.

• RG, 29.03.1895 - 94/95

  Fällt ein Lehrherr, welcher mit seinen minderjährigen, in seiner häuslichen …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  94/95; Ñ€µÑˆ.
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  The right of access to a court includes not only the right to institute proceedings but also the right to obtain a determination of the dispute by a court (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18, pp. 13-18, §§ 28-36; Osman v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, p. 3166, § 136, and p. 3169, § 147; and Kutic v. Croatia, no. 48778/99, § 25, ECHR 2002-II).
• EGMR, 29.04.1999 - 25088/94

  Chassagnou u.a. ./. Frankreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  In determining whether this requirement is met, the Court recognises that the State enjoys a wide margin of appreciation with regard both to choosing the means of enforcement and to ascertaining whether the consequences of enforcement are justified in the general interest for the purpose of achieving the object of the law in question (see Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95, § 75, ECHR 1999-III).
• EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 29392/95

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  The fact that the Supreme Administrative Court later adopted the view that there was no "right" to purchase a municipal apartment under section 5 § 2 of the Compensation Law did not remove, retrospectively, the arguability of the applicant's claim at the time it was submitted for adjudication (see Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, § 89, ECHR 2001-V and Yanakiev v. Bulgaria, no. 40476/98, § 58, 10 August 2006).
• EGMR, 28.06.1990 - 11761/85

  Obermeier ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  This does not mean, however, that the applicants were denied access to a court, provided that the dispute which they submitted for adjudication was the subject of a genuine examination (see, mutatis mutandis, Obermeier v. Austria, judgment of 28 June 1990, Series A no. 179, p. 21, § 68).
• EGMR, 20.11.1995 - 17849/91

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.03.2007 - 43278/98

  In particular, there must be a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be realised by any measure depriving a person of his possessions (see Pressos Compania Naviera S.A. and Others v. Belgium, judgment of 20 November 1995, Series A no. 332, p. 23, § 38).
• EGMR, 01.03.2002 - 48778/99

  KUTIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 15.05.2003 - 72203/01
• EGMR, 05.11.2002 - 36548/97
• EGMR, 10.08.2006 - 40476/98

  YANAKIEV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 06.09.2005 - 75115/01

  MOHYLOVÁ c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE
• EGMR, 30.04.2002 - 40064/98

  CREDIT BANK and OTHERS v. BULGARIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 36925/10

  Gefängnisse in Bulgarien: Unwürdige Zustände

  43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01 and 194/02, §§ 268-73, 15 March 2007; Kolevi v. Bulgaria, no. 1108/02, §§ 221 and 223, 5 November 2009; Sergey Zolotukhin v. Russia [GC], no. 14939/03, § 131, ECHR 2009; Finger, cited above, §§ 140 and 142; Ponomaryovi v. Bulgaria, no. 5335/05, §§ 73 and 75, ECHR 2011; Ivan Stoyanov Vasilev v. Bulgaria, no. 7963/05, §§ 41 and 43, 4 June 2013; and Dimitrov and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 77938/11, §§ 185-87 and 190, 1 July 2014).
• EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 41661/05

  YAVASHEV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01 and 194/02, § 172, 15 March 2007; and Suljagic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 27912/02, § 42 in fine, 3 November 2009).

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, § 8, 24 April 2008).

• EGMR, 21.07.2016 - 50506/09

  TOMOV AND NIKOLOVA v. BULGARIA

  Even though they referred to the case of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01 and 194/02, 15 March 2007, see its description in paragraphs 38-41 below), the Government urged the Court to differentiate the present case from it because in the case at hand the applicants had bought their land from a private individual, whereas in Velikovi and Others the properties the applicants had subsequently lost had been bought from the State.

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, § 9, 24 April 2008, as well as Tsonkovi, § 27, and Georgieva and Mukareva, § 39, both cited above).

• EGMR, 07.07.2009 - 12278/03

  PADALEVICIUS v. LITHUANIA

  43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01 and 194/02, 15 March 2007).

  Such an approach would run contrary to the principle of rule of law inherent in the Convention (see Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01 and 194/02, §§ 187-188, 15 March 2007).

• EGMR, 11.12.2008 - 54252/00

  MANOLOV AND RACHEVA-MANOLOVA v. BULGARIA

  61330/00, 66840/01 and 69155/01, 8 September 2007), the Court considered that the complaints before it encompassed all effects of the impugned legislation and practice, including legislative and practical developments concerning the applicable compensation scheme, and, therefore, accepted that the relevant events must be seen as a continuing situation (ibid., see also Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 43278/98 et al., §§ 128-139 and 161, 15 March 2007).

  In the present case, having regard to its findings about the nature of the interference with the applicants" property rights, the Court considers that they are entitled to compensation reasonably related to the property's market value (see Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 43278/98 et al., §§ 238 and 248, 15 March 2007).

• EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 5334/11

  KRASTEVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  They relied on the Court's judgment in the case of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01 and 194/02, 15 March 2007), which concerned a similar situation.

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, § 11, 24 April 2008).

• EGMR, 30.03.2017 - 65688/12

  STEFANOVI v. BULGARIA

  The relevant background facts, domestic law and practice in relation to the restitution of urban properties, and in particular the application of section 7 of the Restitution Law, have been summarised in the Court's judgment in the case of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, §§ 110-41, 15 March 2007).

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, 24 April 2008).

• EGMR, 25.08.2015 - 11186/12

  PETROVI v. BULGARIA

  The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice concerning the effect of restitution on third parties have been summarised in the Court's judgment in the case of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, 15 March 2007).

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, § 9, 24 April 2008).

• EGMR, 12.06.2014 - 14717/04

  [ENG]

  Citing the case of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98 and others, § 161, 15 March 2007), the applicants alleged that the question whether their rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 had been interfered with should be examined in the light of the multitude of measures adopted "from 1991 to at least the end of 1999 and possibly also until today".
• EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 3413/05

  GEORGIEVA AND MUKAREVA v. BULGARIA

  The relevant background facts and domestic law and practice have been summarised in the Court's judgments in the cases of Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01, and 194/02, 15 March 2007) and Tsonkovi v. Bulgaria (no. 27213/04, §§ 14-15, 2 July 2009).

  48380/99, 51362/99, 60036/00 and 73465/01, § 10, 24 April 2008).

• EGMR, 08.11.2007 - 45116/98

  KALINOVA c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 48059/06

  DIMITROV AND HAMANOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 24.04.2008 - 48380/99

  TODOROVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 51362/99

  ENEVA AND DOBREV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 01.07.2014 - 77938/11

  DIMITROV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 37346/05

  FINGER v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 194/02

  NIKOLOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 25.11.2010 - 43449/02

  MILEVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 25.10.2011 - 2033/04

  VALKOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 69855/01

  LYUBOMIR POPOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 73465/01

  TZILEVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 31.05.2016 - 69735/11

  VUKUSIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 17.05.2016 - 38359/13

  DZINIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 24.11.2015 - 17467/07

  PAUKSTIS v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 08.03.2011 - 71243/01

  VISTINS AND PEREPJOLKINS v. LATVIA
• EGMR, 26.11.2009 - 17353/03

  NAYDENOV c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 14.10.2014 - 31102/06

  PAPLAUSKIENE v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 21.07.2009 - 27576/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 24.03.2009 - 21911/03

  TUDOR TUDOR v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 60036/00

  BOGDANOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 28.05.2013 - 14717/04

  BERGER-KRALL AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA
• EGMR, 22.11.2012 - 31933/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 15.11.2016 - 49426/09

  MISIUKONIS AND OTHERS v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 24546/09

  ZAHI v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 38515/03

  [FRE]
• EGMR, 21.07.2009 - 26892/05

  IGARIENE AND PETRAUSKIENE v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 01.07.2008 - 31005/03

  IOAN c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 53367/99

  STOYANOVA AND IVANOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 14.03.2017 - 51752/10

  KAVALIAUSKAS AND OTHERS v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 38334/08

  ANCHEV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 27.05.2014 - 17978/05

  ARLAUSKAS AND ALBERGAS v. LITHUANIA and 8 other applications
• EGMR, 12.11.2013 - 45092/07

  PYRANTIENE v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 05.07.2011 - 40047/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 30.09.2010 - 20844/09

  HASANI v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 03.09.2009 - 17124/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 42617/02

  VLADIMIROVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 48380/99

  TODOROVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 42322/09

  GRIGALIUNIENE v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 07.05.2013 - 12664/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 05.02.2013 - 53988/07

  BASHIKAROVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 10913/04

  GEORGIEVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 02.07.2009 - 29722/04

  PESHEVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 57176/00

  KOPRINAROVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 32066/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 01.12.2015 - 57675/09

  ZILINSKIENE v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 10.09.2013 - 1002/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 48704/07

  TONOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 25805/05

  HOLEVICH v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 09.06.2011 - 37400/06

  TESAR ET AUTRES c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE
• EGMR, 15.03.2011 - 36103/04

  [FRE]
• EGMR, 06.01.2011 - 14336/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 40149/05

  MADZHAROV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 36561/05

  OTAVA c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE
• EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 24186/04

  BACHVAROVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 30945/04

  KAYRIAKOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 09.07.2009 - 23677/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 02.07.2009 - 19162/03

  YURUKOVA AND SAMUNDZHI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 25.06.2009 - 76963/01

  GYULEVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 31.03.2009 - 32174/02

  LUMINITA-ANTOANETA MARINESCU c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 12.02.2009 - 56753/00

  DIMITAR AND ANKA DIMITROVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.02.2009 - 60805/00

  MITEVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.02.2009 - 55722/00

  SIMOVA AND GEORGIEV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 02.09.2008 - 65417/01

  PETKOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 27.03.2008 - 17868/07

  KOSTADIN MIHAYLOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 13.12.2007 - 32457/05

  GASHI v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 08.11.2007 - 50954/99

  MASLENKOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 61330/00

  SHOILEKOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 24.11.2015 - 42927/08

  TUNAITIS v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 24.11.2015 - 17285/08

  NOREIKIENE AND NOREIKA v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 17241/06

  YONKOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 07.07.2009 - 24435/05

  TRIFONOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 02.07.2009 - 31836/04

  KIROVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 02.07.2009 - 27213/04

  TSONKOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 10.03.2009 - 9164/02

  ICHIM c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 03.03.2009 - 5191/05

  DZHAGAROVA & OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 03.03.2009 - 13636/02

  COSTESCU v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 12.02.2009 - 6189/03

  MIHAYLOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 26560/05

  YAKIMOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 16.09.2008 - 14226/04

  IVANOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 06.11.2007 - 63813/00

  LAZAROVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 09.10.2007 - 60805/00

  MITEVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 25.09.2007 - 20568/02

  MARINOVA AND RADEVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 25.09.2007 - 76963/01

  GYULEVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 57176/00

  KOPRINAROVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 59993/00

  BORNAZOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 05.01.2016 - 14303/11

  BUDIMIR v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 06.07.2010 - 33730/04

  ILARIA GEORGIEVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 26.11.2009 - 22186/03

  PESKOVÁ v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
• EGMR, 19.11.2009 - 39867/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 02.07.2009 - 27636/04

  PANAYOTOVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 13640/03

  VIHRA NIKOLOVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 03.03.2009 - 72912/01

  BOZHIDAR PETROV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 55148/00

  VASIL AND RAYNA DIMITROVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 10.04.2007 - 51745/99

  KABAKCHIEVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 48014/99

  CHOLAKOVI v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.05.2005 - 45437/99

  WULPE v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 13.09.2011 - 8947/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 32626/06

  MANOVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.01.2010 - 16563/03

  [FRE]
• EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 40423/04

  ATANASOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA