La jurisprudences de CEDH - page 826

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/REQUÉTE N° 7654/76 Daniel VAN OOSTERWIJCK v/BELGIU M Daniel VAN OOSTERWIKCK c/BELGIQU E DECISION of 9 May 1978 on the admissibility of the application DÉCISION du 9 mai 1978 sur la recevabilité de la requêt e A rtic% 8 of the Convention and Artic% 12 of the Convention : The refusal to recognise officialfy the new sex of a transsexual raises complex issues under these provisions . Complaint declared admissible. A rticle 26 of the Convention : a Where the evaluation of facts by a judge is concerned, and no erroneous apphcation of the law...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/REQUETE N° 7940/77 X . c/the UNITED KINGDOM ' . . ~ X . c/ROYAUME-UNI ' DECISION of 9 May 1978 on the admissibility of the application DÉCISION du 9 mai 1978 sur la recevabilité de la requ®t e Article 8, paragraph 1 of the Convention : Appointment of a Guardian ad litem for a pen;on who has just undergone a brain operation . On the facts, no interference in the right to respect for family life . Article 8, peregraphe 1, de la Convention : Désignation d'un curateur ad litem à une personne venant de subir une opération du ce rveau. En...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/REQUETE N° 8000/7 7 X . v/ SWITZERLAN D X . c/SUISS E DECISION of 9 May 1978 on the admissibility of the application DÉCISION du 9 mai 1978 sur la recevabilité de la requêt e Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention : A dispute with the Federal Patent Office over the formalities to be complied with in order to acquire a valid patent does not concern civil rights or obligations . However, a dispute over the ownership of a patent concerns civil rights or obligations . Article 6, paragraph 1 does not apply when the existence of a disputed...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/REQUETE N° 7361/76 Trade Union X . v/BELGIUM ' Syndicat X . c/BELGIQUE ' DECISION of 8 May 1978 on the admissibility of the application DÉCISION du 8 mai 1978 sur la recevabilité de la requêt e Artic% 11, paragraph 1 of the Convention : Article 11, paragraph 1, does not guarantee to trade unions or their members a particular kind of treatment by the State . It guarantees that trade unions should be heard and collective bargaining is only one of the means to, achieve thts . Artic%14 of the Convention, together with Article 11 of the...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATIQN/REQUETE N° 7761/77 X . v/AUSTRIA ' X . c ./AUTRICHE ' DECISION of 8 May 1978 on the admissibility of the application DECISIQN du 8 mai 1978 sur la recevabilité de la requèt e A rtlcle 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention : This provision does not oblige States to allow individuals the opportunity of having their case re-opened once the judgment has become linal. Nor does it apply to proceedings which determine whether the case in a civil matter is to be re-opened or not . Article 6, paragraphe 1, de la Convention : Cette disposition n'impose...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/REQUETE N° 7819/7 7 J .J . CAMPBELL v/the UNITED KINGDOM • J .J . CAMPBELL c/ROYAUME-UNI • DECISION of 6 May 1978 on the admissibility of the application DÉCISION du 6 mai 1978 sur la recevabilité de la reqûét e Article 6 paragraph 1 of the Conventio nlaCrimchge . Does this provision apply to disciplinary punishment o f a convicted prisone r, consisting of 605 days' loss of rethission and ~ 917 days' cellular confinement ? Examination according to criteria established by the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Engel and...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/RE Q UÈTE N° 7994/77' -. Josef Johann KOTALLA v/the NETHERLANDS' - 'JosefJôhân 'KOTAL Ac/PAYS-BAS' - " DECISION of 6 Maÿ 1978 ôn the admissibility of the applicatio requête Artic% 3 of the Convention : nDÉCISONdu6mai1978srlecvbitéda ' does not reqûire that a sentence of life imprisonmen t -laThisprovn must be re-examined with a view to a prisoner's being released through . an act of grace or otherwise Particular reference to domestic case-lawl . Ibl Article 3 is not violatedwhen a prisoner serving a fife sentence gers th...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/REQUÉTE N° 8266/78 X . v/UNITED KINGDO M X . c/ROYAUME-UN I DECISION of 4 December 1978 on the admissibility of the applicatio n . DÉCISION du 4 mai1978 sur la recevabilité de la requête , Article 10, paragraph 1, of the Convention : In allowing States to require the licensing of broadcasting enterprises, this provision permits them to prosecute those engaged in the promoting of unlicensed broadcasting .' Article 10, paragraph 2, of the Convention : The .prohibition of notices advertising illicit broadcasting constitutes an interference...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/REOUETE N° 8065/7 7 X . v/the UNITED KINGDOM ' X . c/ROYAUME-UNI ' DECISION .of 3 May1978 on the admissibility of the application DECISION du 3 mai 1978 sur la recevabilité de la requPt e Article 8 of the Convention : Close surveillance of visits made to a prisoner by his wife and children is an interference in the exercise of their right to respect for their private and family life . Since such measures concern someone condemned of serious offence s linked to his membership of a terrorist organisation, they can be considered as necesiary...

Art. 14 DISCRIMINATION, Art. 3 PEINE DEGRADANTE, Art. 3 PEINE INHUMAINE ... APPLICATION/REQUeTE N° 7597/7 6 BERTRAND RUSSEL PEACE FOUNDATION Ltd v/the UNITED KINGDO M BERTRAND RUSSEL PEACE FOUNDATION Ltd c/ROYAUME-UN I DECISION of 2 May 1978 on the admissibility of the application DÉCISION du 2 mai 1978 sur la recevabilité de la requêt e Article I of the Convention : It is not enough that the victim of an alleged violation is subject to the jurisdiction of a Contracting State ; the actual fact our of which the alleged violation arises must, in addition, come wirhin the area of jurisdiction of that Stare, in the exercise of...