W. and Krenz against Germany.

Relevant provisions of the German Civil Code The statutory provisions on custody and access are to be found in the German Civil Code.

Pursuant to a European Investigation Order issued by the Frankfurt am Main Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office the French authorities transferred the data to the prosecutor’s office via the German Federal

The father of the child, Ž.P., moved to Croatia in 1999, whereas the applicant continued living with their son in Germany.

Germany (application no. 71916/01), von Zitzewitz and Others v. Germany (no. 71917/01) and Man Ferrostaal and Alfred Töpfer Stiftung v. Germany (no.   10260/02).

This conclusion was not altered by the fact that the applicant was a German national living in Germany who, had he been employed, would have worked in Germany.

Germany [GC], no. 75529/01, ECHR 2006-...; Nold v. Germany , no. 27250/02, 29 June 2006; Stork v. Germany , no. 38033/02, 13 July 2006; Klasen v. Germany , no. 75204/01, 5 October 2006; Grässer v.

; text-align:left } .s23ADBB69 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)7 [1] Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights Epple against Germany

Germany - 9300/07 Judgment 20.1.2011 [Section V] Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 Peaceful enjoyment of possessions Article 1 para. 2 of Protocol No. 1 Control of the use

  He submitted that the German police had unlawfully brought him from France to the Federal Republic of Germany and that this barred his prosecution.

       As regards the lawfulness of the interference, the Commission observes that the German authorities, when ordering the first applicant to leave Germany, relied on Section

the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 4 August 1989   by Mr Claus Hermann Paul Bacher against Germany

On 19 August 1998, the Secretary of State informed the applicant that he was satisfied that Germany was a safe third country. Removal directions to Germany were issued.

GERMANY   The European Court of Human Rights has today delivered at a public hearing its judgments in the cases of Sahin v. Germany (application no. 30943/96) and Sommerfeld v.

There was a legitimate link for criminal prosecution in Germany, as this was in accordance with Germany’s military and humanitarian missions in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the applicant had resided in Germany

It stipulated that P. was allowed to take the children to visit their German grandparents for visits of no more than two weeks’ duration.

Subsequently he went to Germany via Greece. Procedure The applicant applied for asylum in Germany on 12 February 2008.

bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }       FIFTH SECTION Application no. 49278/09 Stuart and Rory GRAY against Germany

  At the same time the second applicant was ordered to leave the Federal Republic of Germany on or before 18 December 1984.