Nerva v UK - difficulty to determine, automous ideal
2 of 11
Intellectual Property
Anheuser -Busch v Portugal - even an application for budaweiser brand can be enough to determine the issuse of prop.
3 of 11
Pensions
Stec v UK - noted that there is no right for the state to provide pensions, but when they do they must not be discriminatory.
4 of 11
Interference with enjoyment of possessions
Sporrong v Lonsroth - exporation order; although not fulfiled would constitute a breach of A1Pr1 although not done .. equal dep.
5 of 11
Broniowski v Poland
Poles told to move from other places, but would be given compensation. Do they have future right ton this no. But in this case it became a legal right, they were constantly reminded.
6 of 11
Legal deprivation justified under;
Provided by the national law, accordace with principles of international law, in public interest
7 of 11
Does compensation have to be proportionate.
Holy Monastries v Greece - authoritries changed the legal status of monastries in question, the law had changed noting they needed proof. Compensation would be given but doesnt have to be the exact match.
8 of 11
Control
Hnadyside v UK - Seizsure obscene publications
9 of 11
Control over lands use
Chassagnou v France - hunting on his land.
10 of 11
Control is aseesed by the proptionatlity test.
Jahn v UK - Family given land by the GDR, but its for argicultural uses, thus they could not keep it when legit government took it back.
11 of 11
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Definition of Property
Back
Nerva v UK - difficulty to determine, automous ideal
Comments
No comments have yet been made