Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
PAJIC v. CROATIA
Violation of Article 14+8 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life;Article 8-1 - Respect for family life;Respect for private life);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) ...
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
PAJIC v. CROATIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)
[DEU] Violation of Article 14+8 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 14 - Discrimination) (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life;Respect for private life;Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - ...
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
PAJIC v. CROATIA
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
- EGMR, 22.11.2017 - 68453/13
Papierfundstellen
- NVwZ-RR 2017, 938
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (18)
- EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13710/88
NIEMIETZ v. GERMANY
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
Indeed, the Court has previously held that the notion of "private life" within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention is a broad concept which encompasses, inter alia, the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings (see Niemietz v. Germany, 16 December 1992, § 29, Series A no. 251-B), the right to "personal development" (see Bensaid v. the United Kingdom, no. 44599/98, § 47, ECHR 2001-I) or the right to self-determination as such (see Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 61, ECHR 2002-III). - EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02
Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
Indeed, the Court has previously held that the notion of "private life" within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention is a broad concept which encompasses, inter alia, the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings (see Niemietz v. Germany, 16 December 1992, § 29, Series A no. 251-B), the right to "personal development" (see Bensaid v. the United Kingdom, no. 44599/98, § 47, ECHR 2001-I) or the right to self-determination as such (see Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 61, ECHR 2002-III). - EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 56501/00
MATA ESTEVEZ v. SPAIN
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
The Court notes at the outset that there is no doubt that the relationship of a same-sex couple like the applicants" falls within the notion of "private life" within the meaning of Article 8 (see, for example, Mata Estevez v. Spain (dec.), no. 56501/00, ECHR 2001-VI).
- EGMR, 10.03.2011 - 2700/10
KIYUTIN c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
Where immigration is concerned, Article 8 or any other Convention provision cannot be considered to impose on a State a general obligation to, for instance, authorise family reunion in its territory (see Jeunesse, cited above, § 107; and Gül v. Switzerland, 19 February 1996, § 38, Reports 1996-I; and Kiyutin v. Russia, no. 2700/10, § 38, ECHR 2011). - EGMR, 24.06.2010 - 30141/04
SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
In this connection the Court reiterates its established case-law in respect of different-sex couples, namely that the notion of "family" under this provision is not confined to marriage-based relationships and may encompass other de facto "family" ties where the parties are living together out of wedlock (see Schalk and Kopf v. Austria, no. 30141/04, § 91, ECHR 2010). - EGMR, 29.04.1999 - 25644/94
T.W. v. MALTA
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
In other words, when a remedy has been pursued, use of another remedy which has essentially the same objective is not required (see T.W. v. Malta [GC], no. 25644/94, § 34, 29 April 1999; Moreira Barbosa v. Portugal (dec.), no. 65681/01, ECHR 2004-V; and Jelicic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), no. 41183/02, 15 November 2005; and Jasinskis v. Latvia, no. 45744/08, § 50, 21 December 2010). - EGMR, 28.07.2009 - 30754/04
DVORACEK AND DVORACKOVA v. SLOVAKIA
- EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 40016/98
KARNER c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
On the other hand, the Court has repeatedly held that, just like differences based on sex, differences based on sexual orientation require "particularly convincing and weighty reasons" by way of justification (see, for example, Smith and Grady v. the United Kingdom, nos. 33985/96 and 33986/96, § 90, ECHR 1999-VI; Karner v. Austria, no. 40016/98, §§ 37 and 42, ECHR 2003-IX; and X and Others v. Austria, cited above, § 99). - EGMR, 01.07.2014 - 43835/11
Gesichtsschleier-Verbot rechtens
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
A general policy or measure that has disproportionately prejudicial effects on a particular group may be considered discriminatory even where it is not specifically aimed at that group and there is no discriminatory intent This is only the case, however, if such policy or measure has no "objective and reasonable" justification (see, among other authorities, S.A.S. v. France [GC], no. 43835/11, § 161, ECHR 2014 (extracts)). - EGMR, 21.12.1999 - 33290/96
SALGUEIRO DA SILVA MOUTA c. PORTUGAL
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 68453/13
Differences based solely on considerations of sexual orientation are unacceptable under the Convention (see Salgueiro da Silva Mouta v. Portugal, no. 33290/96, § 36, ECHR 1999-IX; E.B. v. France, cited above, §§ 93 and 96; X and Others v. Austria, cited above, § 99; and Vallianatos and Others, cited above, § 77). - EGMR, 28.04.2004 - 56679/00
AZINAS c. CHYPRE
- EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 72286/01
MELNIK v. UKRAINE
- EGMR, 29.11.2007 - 9852/03
HUMMATOV v. AZERBAIJAN
- EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00
MIFSUD contre la FRANCE
- EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 9214/80
ABDULAZIZ, CABALES AND BALKANDALI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 22.01.2008 - 43546/02
E.B. v. FRANCE
- EGMR, 20.07.2004 - 47940/99
BALOGH v. HUNGARY
- EGMR, 11.10.2011 - 53124/09
GENOVESE v. MALTA
- Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 11.01.2018 - C-673/16
Nach Auffassung von Generalanwalt Wathelet umfasst der Begriff "Ehegatte" im …
11 Vgl. in diesem Sinne EGMR, 7. November 2013, Vallianatos u. a./Griechenland, CE:ECHR:2013:1107JUD002938109, § 73, EGMR, 21. Juli 2015, 01iari u. a./Italien, CE:ECHR:2015:0721JUD001876611, § 169, und EGMR, 23. Februar 2016, Pajic/Kroatien, CE:ECHR:2016:0223JUD006845313, § 65. Durch das Bestehen der Lebensgemeinschaft von Herrn Coman und Herrn Hamilton vor ihrer "Festigung" in einem Mitgliedstaat der Union unterscheidet sich ihre Situation von den Situationen, die dem Urteil vom 12. März 2014, 0. und B. (C-456/12, EU:C:2014:135), zugrunde lagen.48 Vgl. in diesem Sinne EGMR, 7. November 2013, Vallianatos u. a./Griechenland, CE:ECHR:2013:1107JUD002938109, § 73, EGMR, 23. Februar 2016, Pajic/Kroatien, CE:ECHR:2016:0223JUD006845313, § 64, EGMR, 14. Juni 2016, Aldeguer Tomás/Spanien, CE:ECHR:2016:0614JUD003521409, § 75, und EGMR, 30. Juni 2016, Taddeucci und McCall/Italien, CE:ECHR:2016:0630JUD005136209, § 58.
53 Vgl. in diesem Sinne EGMR, 23. Februar 2016, Pajic/Kroatien, CE:ECHR:2016:0223JUD006845313, §§ 59 und 84, und EGMR, 30. Juni 2016, Taddeucci und McCall/Italien, CE:ECHR:2016:0630JUD005136209, § 89.
73 Vgl. in diesem Sinne EGMR, 23. Februar 2016, Pajic/Kroatien, CE:ECHR:2016:0223JUD006845313, §§ 59 und 84, und EGMR, 30. Juni 2016, Taddeucci und McCall/Italien, CE:ECHR:2016:0630JUD005136209, § 89.
- OVG Berlin-Brandenburg, 22.09.2020 - 3 B 38.19
Familiennachzug der Eltern; minderjähriger subsidiär Schutzberechtigter; Eintritt …
Da sich ein individueller Anspruch auf Familiennachzug im Bundesgebiet aber weder unmittelbar aus Art. 8 Abs. 1 EMRK noch aus Art. 6 Abs. 1 GG ableiten lässt (vgl. nur EGMR, Urteil vom 23. Februar 2016 - 68453/13 - NVwZ-RR 2017, 938 Rn. 79; BVerfG…, Beschluss vom 12. Mai 1987 - 2 BvR 1226/83 u.a. - juris Rn. 96; dazu auch Nußberger, in: NVwZ 2013, 1305, 1310), obliegt die konkrete Ausgestaltung der den Nachzug regelnden aufenthaltsrechtlichen Vorschriften allein dem Gesetzgeber.