Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ZNAMENSKAYA v. RUSSIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 8 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses - claim dismissed (englisch)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 25.03.2004 - 77785/01
• EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 77785/01

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 27.10.1994 - 18535/91

  KROON AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 77785/01

  Referring to the Court's case-law, she maintained that "'respect' for 'family life' requires that biological and social reality prevail over a legal presumption which... flies in the face of both established fact and the wishes of those concerned without actually benefiting anyone" (Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands, judgment of 27 October 1994, Series A no. 297-C, § 40).

  As is well established in the Court's case-law, the notion of "family life" in Article 8 refers to the existence of "family ties" between partners, whether marital or non-marital, and a child born to the partners is ipso jure part of that relationship from the moment of its birth and by the very fact of it (see, in particular, the following judgments: Gül v. Switzerland of 19 February 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-I, § 32; Keegan v. Ireland of 26 May 1994, Series A no. 290, p. 17, § 44, and Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands of 27 October 1994, Series A no. 297-C, § 30).

• EGMR, 22.02.1994 - 16213/90

  BURGHARTZ c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 77785/01

  Although that provision does not mention a right to a name explicitly, a person's name - as a means of personal identification and of linking to a family - nonetheless concerns his or her private and family life (see, in particular, the following judgments: Burghartz v. Switzerland of 22 February 1994, Series A no. 280-B, p. 28, § 24; Stjerna v. Finland of 25 November 1994, Series A no. 299-B, p. 60, § 37; and Guillot v. France of 24 October 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-V, pp. 1602-03, § 21).
• EGMR, 26.05.1994 - 16969/90

  KEEGAN v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 77785/01

  As is well established in the Court's case-law, the notion of "family life" in Article 8 refers to the existence of "family ties" between partners, whether marital or non-marital, and a child born to the partners is ipso jure part of that relationship from the moment of its birth and by the very fact of it (see, in particular, the following judgments: Gül v. Switzerland of 19 February 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-I, § 32; Keegan v. Ireland of 26 May 1994, Series A no. 290, p. 17, § 44, and Kroon and Others v. the Netherlands of 27 October 1994, Series A no. 297-C, § 30).

 
• EKMR, 01.10.1990 - 15817/89

  WAKEFIELD v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 77785/01

  However, it has also been the Convention organs' traditional approach to accept that close relationships short of "family life" would generally fall within the scope of "private life" (see, for example, Wakefield v. the United Kingdom, no. 15817/89, Commission decision of 1 October 1990 [relationship between a prisoner and his fiancée]; X. and Y. v. the United Kingdom, no. 9369/81, Commission decision of 3 May 1983 [same-sex relationship]; and X. v. Switzerland, no. 8257/78, Commission decision of 10 July 1978 [relationship between a foster mother and the child she had looked after]).
• EKMR, 03.05.1983 - 9369/81

  X. and Y. v. the UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 77785/01

  However, it has also been the Convention organs' traditional approach to accept that close relationships short of "family life" would generally fall within the scope of "private life" (see, for example, Wakefield v. the United Kingdom, no. 15817/89, Commission decision of 1 October 1990 [relationship between a prisoner and his fiancée]; X. and Y. v. the United Kingdom, no. 9369/81, Commission decision of 3 May 1983 [same-sex relationship]; and X. v. Switzerland, no. 8257/78, Commission decision of 10 July 1978 [relationship between a foster mother and the child she had looked after]).
• EKMR, 10.07.1978 - 8257/78

  X. v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 77785/01

  However, it has also been the Convention organs' traditional approach to accept that close relationships short of "family life" would generally fall within the scope of "private life" (see, for example, Wakefield v. the United Kingdom, no. 15817/89, Commission decision of 1 October 1990 [relationship between a prisoner and his fiancée]; X. and Y. v. the United Kingdom, no. 9369/81, Commission decision of 3 May 1983 [same-sex relationship]; and X. v. Switzerland, no. 8257/78, Commission decision of 10 July 1978 [relationship between a foster mother and the child she had looked after]).

• EGMR, 21.12.2010 - 20578/07

  Anayo ./. Deutschland

  Ein Kind, das aus einer solchen Beziehung hervorgeht, ist vom Augenblick seiner Geburt an und schon allein durch seine Geburt ipso iure Teil dieser "Familien"-Einheit (…siehe Keegan ./. Irland, 26. Mai 1994, Rdnr. 44, Serie A Bd. 290;… Lebbink ./. die Niederlande, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 45582/99, Rdnr. 35, ECHR 2004-IV; und Znamenskaya ./. Russland, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 77785/01, Rdnr. 26, 2. Juni 2005).
• OLG Köln, 09.01.2023 - 14 UF 126/22
  B. trägt zudem seit 1 ½ Jahren den Nachnamen der Annehmenden; ein wesentlicher Identitätsfaktor (EGMR, Urteil vom 02.06.2005 - 77785/01, Znaamenskaya v. Russia, www.hudoc.coe.int ).
• EGMR, 18.03.2008 - 33375/03

  H.-G. H. gegen Deutschland

  Ein Kind, das aus einer solchen Beziehung hervorgeht, ist vom Augenblick seiner Geburt an und schon allein durch seine Geburt ipso iure Teil dieser "Familien"-Einheit (…siehe Keegan ./. Irland , Urteil vom 26. Mai 1994, Serie A Bd. 290, S. 17-18, Rdnr. 44;… Lebbink ./. die Niederlande , Individualbeschwerde Nr. 45582/99, Rdnr. 35, ECHR 2004-IV; und Znamenskaya ./. Russland , Individualbeschwerde Nr. 77785/01, Rdnr. 26, 2. Juni 2005).

 
• EGMR, 30.11.2017 - 37283/13

  STRAND LOBBEN AND OTHERS v. NORWAY

  As to the scope of Article 8 of the Convention, the existence or non-existence of "family life" is "essentially a question of fact depending upon the real existence in practice of close personal ties" (see, for instance, K. and T. v. Finland [GC], no. 25702/94, § 150, ECHR 2001-VII, and Znamenskaya v. Russia, no. 77785/01, § 27, 2 June 2005).
• EGMR, 12.06.2014 - 50132/12

  MARIC v. CROATIA

  It has considered the "private life" aspect of Article 8 to be applicable to the question of whether a mother had the right to change the family name on the tombstone of her stillborn child (see Znamenskaya v. Russia, no. 77785/01, § 27, 2 June 2005), and also the excessive delay by the domestic authorities in returning the body of the applicants" child following an autopsy to be an interference with the private and family life of the applicants (see Pannullo and Forte v. France, no. 37794/97, § 36, ECHR 2001-X), just as the refusal of the investigative authorities to return the suspects body to his relatives (see Sabanchiyeva and Others v. Russia, no. 38450/05, § 123, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 17.04.2018 - 6878/14

  LAZORIVA v. UKRAINE

  Close relationships short of "family life" would generally fall within the scope of "private life" (see Znamenskaya v. Russia, no. 77785/01, § 27, 2 June 2005, with further references cited therein).