Hudoc Violation of P1-1; Just satisfaction reserved
‘The first rule, set out in the first sentence of the first paragraph, is of a general nature and enunciates the principle of the peaceful enjoyment of property; the second rule, contained in the second sentence of the first paragraph, covers deprivation of possessions and subjects it to certain conditions; the third rule, stated in the second paragraph, recognises that the Contracting States are entitled, amongst other things, to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest … The three rules are not, however, ‘distinct’ in the sense of being unconnected. The second and third rules are concerned with particular instances of interference with the right to peaceful enjoyment of property and should therefore be construed in the light of the general principle enunciated in the first rule.’
31524/96, 51, ECHR 2000-VI, [2000] ECHR 204, [2003] ECHR 562, [2000] ECHR 205
Worldlii, Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights P-1A-1
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Stockholms Forsakrings- Och Skadestandsjuridik Ab v Sweden ECHR 16-Sep-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion) ; Violation of P1-1 ; No violation of Art. 6-1 ; Violation of Art. 13 ; Pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.165874
