In line with the rules governing the Hagen penal institution, which provided that detainees of German nationality had to do their written correspondence in German whereas foreign nationals could write

Inadmissible under Article 10: The applicant had been dismissed from the civil service after the reunification of Germany on account of his lack of professional qualifications.

The Lebanese authorities had refused to transfer him to Germany for the purposes of the proceedings.

    On 23 April 1993 the military prosecutor informed the applicant that, based on the reply by the German authorities, his son had not been found in any of the German medical or military establishments

delivered on 12 May 1992 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;        Recalling that the case originated in an application against the Federal Republic of Germany

delivered on 21 February 1984 and 23 October 1984 and transmitted the same days to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling that the case originated in an application against the Federal Republic of Germany

  Upon their arrival in Germany, the applicants indicated that they had left Yugoslavia for personal reasons.

Therefore the prolongation of the arbitration proceedings did not violate the German 'ordre public' even if the rules on the arbitration procedure had not been fully respected.

Therefore the prolongation of the arbitration proceedings did not violate the German 'ordre public' even if the rules on the arbitration procedure had not been fully respected.

Germany (cited above) and Garcia Cancio v. Germany (cited above). COMPLAINT 11.

:inline-block } .sD206BAD8 { width:6.64pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 58616/09 by Ursula Marie GREBING against Germany

page-break-after:avoid } .sACC481A8 { width:192.94pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 2390/09 by Martin KUSCHMANN against Germany

a “fair balance” between the interests of the applicant and the general interest of German society.

Federal Republic of Germany The Federal Republic of Germany, represented by the Agent of the Government in the Federal Ministry of Justice, Mohrenstr. 37, 10117 Berlin, and the Applicant Helga Zock hereby

Foreign legal persons were granted the same legal status as German legal persons if legal persons domiciled in Germany would likewise be granted legal aid in the State concerned under the Hague Convention

:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 3 November 2016   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 70693/11 Klaus Günter ANNEN against Germany

against Germany lodged on 10 January 2018 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the Uniformity of Collective Agreements Act ( Tarifeinheitsgesetz ), which regulates conflicts that arise

He went to Germany with his parents and four brothers in April 1985, when he was five years old. He attended school in Germany, but did not obtain a leaving certificate.

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.

to write their outgoing correspondence in languages other than German.