Bayefsky.com

The United Nations Human Rights Treaties

Jurisprudence

CCPR - Austria

List of all admissibility decisions

Case Name Comm Number Date Outcome
Pauger v. Austria 415/1990 22 March 1991 Admissible
H.H. v. Austria 427/1990 22 October 1992 Inadmissible
Nahlik v. Austria 608/1995 22 July 1996 Inadmissible
Pauger v. Austria 716/1996 09 July 1997 Admissible
Darwish v. Austria 679/1996 28 July 1997 Inadmissible
Althammer et al v. Austria 803/1998 21 March 2002 Inadmissible
Krausser v. Austria 890/1999 23 October 2002 Inadmissible
Kollar v. Austria 989/2001 30 July 2003 Inadmissible
Irschik v. Austria 990/2001 19 March 2004 Inadmissible
Dichtl et al. v. Austria 999/2001 07 July 2004 Inadmissible
Chanderbali v. Austria 944/2000 26 October 2004 Inadmissible
Winkler v. Austria 1468/2006 24 July 2007 Inadmissible
B.H. v. Austria 2088/2011 28 March 2017 Inadmissible
B.H. v. Austria 2088/2011 28 March 2017 Inadmissible

Information in this section of Bayefsky.com is as of May 2018. To update use the UN website search engine here.

CERD, CCPR, CESCR, CEDAW, CAT, CRC, CMW, CRPD and CED all have optional complaint mechanisms, whereby an individual may complain to the respective treaty body that his or her rights under the treaty have been violated. The CMW complaint mechanism is not yet in force.

Included in this section are:

  1. requests made by the treaty body for interim measures
  2. decisions to deal jointly with cases
  3. admissibility decisions (normally decisions determining a complaint is admissible are not issued separately and hence this category involves decisions in which complaints are found to be inadmissible)
  4. final views.

Information on follow-up of final Views where a violation has been found is included in the section entitled "Follow-up: Jurisprudence".