Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KURIC AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA

  Art. 41, Art. 46, Art. 46 Abs. 2 MRK
  Damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage) Damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage) (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KURIC ET AUTRES c. SLOVÉNIE

  Art. 41, Art. 46, Art. 46 Abs. 2 MRK
  Dommage - demande rejetée (Article 41 - Dommage matériel) Dommage - réparation (Article 41 - Dommage matériel) (französisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 26828/06
• EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 26828/06
• EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 26828/06
• EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06
• EGMR, 25.05.2016 - 26828/06

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (16)

• EGMR, 04.12.2008 - 30562/04

  S. und Marper ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  30562/04 and 30566/04, § 134, ECHR 2008).
• EGMR, 07.06.2012 - 38433/09

  CENTRO EUROPA 7 S.R.L. AND DI STEFANO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  The question to be decided in such cases is the level of just satisfaction, in respect of both past and future pecuniary losses, which it is necessary to award each applicant, the matter to be determined by the Court at its discretion, having regard to what is equitable (see, mutatis mutandis, The Sunday Times (no. 1) (former Article 50), cited above § 15; Smith and Grady (just satisfaction), cited above, §§ 18-19, ECHR 2000-IX; Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, §§ 119-120, ECHR 2001-V; and Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, §§ 218-222, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 29392/95

  Z ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  The question to be decided in such cases is the level of just satisfaction, in respect of both past and future pecuniary losses, which it is necessary to award each applicant, the matter to be determined by the Court at its discretion, having regard to what is equitable (see, mutatis mutandis, The Sunday Times (no. 1) (former Article 50), cited above § 15; Smith and Grady (just satisfaction), cited above, §§ 18-19, ECHR 2000-IX; Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, §§ 119-120, ECHR 2001-V; and Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, §§ 218-222, ECHR 2012).

 
• EGMR, 04.10.2007 - 32772/02

  Verein gegen Tierfabriken Schweiz (VGT) ./. Schweiz

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  The Grand Chamber observes in this connection that according to the principle of subsidiarity and the margin of appreciation which goes with it, the amounts of compensation awarded at national level to other adversely affected persons in the context of general measures under Article 46 of the Convention are at the discretion of the respondent State, provided that they are compatible with the Court's judgment ordering those measures (see, mutatis mutandis, Verein gegen Tierfabriken Schweiz (VgT) v. Switzerland (no. 2) [GC], no. 32772/02, § 88, ECHR 2009).
• EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 39221/98

  SCOZZARI ET GIUNTA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  Such measures must also be taken in respect of other persons in the applicants" position, notably by solving the problems that have led to the Court's findings (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII; Lukenda, cited above, § 94; and S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos.
• EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23657/94

  ÇAKICI v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  In appropriate cases, this may include compensation in respect of loss of earnings (see, among other authorities, Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain (former Article 50), 13 June 1994, §§ 16-20, Series A no. 285-C, and Çakıcı v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, § 127, ECHR 1999-IV).
• EGMR, 18.07.2013 - 2312/08

  MAKTOUF ET DAMJANOVIC c. BOSNIE-HERZÉGOVINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  According to the Court's case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see, for example, Maktouf and Damjanovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08, § 94, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 13.06.1994 - 10588/83

  BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN (ARTICLE 50)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  In appropriate cases, this may include compensation in respect of loss of earnings (see, among other authorities, Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain (former Article 50), 13 June 1994, §§ 16-20, Series A no. 285-C, and Çakıcı v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, § 127, ECHR 1999-IV).
• EGMR, 23.11.2010 - 60041/08

  GREENS ET M.T. c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  60041/08 and 60054/08, § 108, ECHR 2010 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 07.05.1974 - 1936/63

  NEUMEISTER v. AUSTRIA (ARTICLE 50)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2014 - 26828/06

  As to the issue of VAT raised by the Government, the Grand Chamber reiterates that, if necessary, the Court makes awards in respect of costs and expenses with a view to reimbursing the sums which the applicants have had to incur in seeking to prevent a violation, to have it established by the Court and (if need be) to obtain just satisfaction - following a judgment in their favour - either from the competent national authorities or, where appropriate, from the Court (see Neumeister v. Austria (former Article 50), 7 May 1974, § 43, Series A no. 17; König v. Germany (former Article 50), 10 March 1980, § 20, Series A no. 36; and Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 284, ECHR 2006-V).
• EGMR, 04.12.2008 - 30566/04
• EGMR, 23.09.2008 - 50425/99

  E.G. c. POLOGNE ET 175 AUTRES AFFAIRES DE LA RIVIÈRE BOUG
• EGMR - 34179/08 (anhängig)

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 11.06.2002 - 36042/97

  WILLIS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1) (ARTICLE 50)
• EGMR, 08.12.2016 - 23032/02

  LUKENDA AND 263 OTHER CASES AGAINST SLOVENIA

• EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 9300/07

  Herrmann ./. Deutschland

  Dies bedeutet, dass die Große Kammer die gesamte Beschwerde prüfen kann, soweit sie für zulässig erklärt wurde; dagegen kann sie die Teile der Beschwerde, die von der Kammer für unzulässig erklärt wurden, nicht prüfen (Syssoyeva und andere./. Lettland (Streichung) [GK], Nr. 60654/00, Rdnrn.59-62, CEDH 2007-I, und Kuric und andere./.Slowenien [GK], Nr. 26828/06, Rdnr. 235, 26.
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 07.09.2023 - C-128/22

  NORDIC INFO - Vorlage zur Vorabentscheidung - Freizügigkeit - Nationale Maßnahmen …

  Vgl. zur EMRK das Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte (EGMR) vom 26. Juni 2012, Kuric u. a./Slowenien (CE:ECHR:2014:0312JUD002682806, § 355).