Citaat | Parket bij de Hoge Raad 30 september 2013

Onder 67. Parket bij de Hoge Raad 30 september 2013

Een alinea uit Parket bij de Hoge Raad 30 september 2013, ECLI:NL:PHR:2013:863.

The Court recalls that the principle underlying the provision of just satisfaction is that the applicant should as far as possible be put in the position he would have enjoyed had the violation found by the Court not occurred (Kingsley v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 35605/97, § 40, ECHR 2002-IV). As shown by the judgment in Van Raalte (cited above), it does not inevitably follow from a finding of a violation of Article 14 that an award of just satisfaction must be made to reflect any pecuniary damage allegedly suffered as a result of the differential treatment. Whether such an award is made will depend on all the circumstances of the case, including the field in which the discriminatory treatment arose; whether the applicant belongs to a similarly affected class of persons; the size of any such class; the nature of the legislative provision, if any, giving rise to the discriminatory treatment; and, where such discrimination has been eliminated as the result of an amendment of the relevant provisions, the nature of, and reasons underlying, the amendment.

Zelf controleren

Voor dit citaat hoeft niemand Bron op zijn woord te geloven. Het document dat rechtspraak.nl publiceerde, staat op https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/4626fcdc9b24ce219e3ece46383a03cbf386f5a5cd07010db132b9e541637376. Wie het ophaalt en de SHA-256 ervan berekent, krijgt 4626fcdc9b24ce219e3ece46383a03cbf386f5a5cd07010db132b9e541637376, en de alinea staat in dat document op bytes 264714 tot 265798.