Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LOLAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Torture) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 ...

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Lolayev v. Russia

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  The Court has previously had before it cases in which it has found that there has been treatment which could only be described as torture (see, among others, Aksoy, cited above, p. 2279, § 64; Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 105, ECHR 1999-V; Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 116, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts); and Samoylov, cited above, §§ 52-54, 2 October 2008).
• EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7367/76

  GUZZARDI v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  Although the process of classification into one or the other of these categories sometimes proves to be no easy task, in that some borderline cases are a matter of pure opinion, the Court cannot avoid making the selection upon which the applicability or inapplicability of Article 5 depends (see Guzzardi v. Italy, 6 November 1980, Series A no. 39, §§ 92 and 93, and H.L. v. the United Kingdom, no. 45508/99, § 89, ECHR 2004-IX).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  In cases under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, where the effectiveness of the official investigation was at issue, the Court has often assessed whether the authorities reacted promptly to the complaints at the relevant time (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 133 et seq., ECHR 2000-IV).

 
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  An obligation to investigate "is not an obligation as to result, but as to means": not every investigation should necessarily be successful or come to a conclusion which coincides with the claimant's account of events; however, it should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  Where an individual is taken into custody in good health but is found to have injuries at the time of release, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation of how those injuries were caused (see Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336; see also, mutatis mutandis, Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  An obligation to investigate "is not an obligation as to result, but as to means": not every investigation should necessarily be successful or come to a conclusion which coincides with the claimant's account of events; however, it should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 03.06.2004 - 33097/96

  BATI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  The Court has previously had before it cases in which it has found that there has been treatment which could only be described as torture (see, among others, Aksoy, cited above, p. 2279, § 64; Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 105, ECHR 1999-V; Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 116, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts); and Samoylov, cited above, §§ 52-54, 2 October 2008).
• EKMR, 13.12.1979 - 8278/78

  X. v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  Article 5 of the Convention may apply to deprivations of liberty of even a very short length (see Gillan and Quinton v. the United Kingdom, no. 4158/05, § 57, ECHR 2010 (extracts); X. v. Austria, no. 8278/78, Commission decision of 3 December 1979; Iliya Stefanov v. Bulgaria, no. 65755/01, § 71, 22 May 2008; and Creanga v. Romania [GC], no. 29226/03, § 91, 23 February 2012).
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  Consideration has been given to the commencement of investigations, delays in taking statements (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI, and Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 67, Reports 1998-IV), and the length of time taken during the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001).
• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 57834/00

  KABLAN contre la TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  The Court has previously had before it cases in which it has found that there has been treatment which could only be described as torture (see, among others, Aksoy, cited above, p. 2279, § 64; Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 105, ECHR 1999-V; Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 116, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts); and Samoylov, cited above, §§ 52-54, 2 October 2008).
• EGMR, 18.10.2001 - 31143/96

  INDELICATO c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 22.05.2008 - 65755/01

  ILIYA STEFANOV v. BULGARIA

• EGMR, 22.11.2018 - 29543/15

  KONSTANTINOPOULOS ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE (N° 2)

  Dans ces circonstances, la Cour estime que les autorités ont manqué à leur obligation, au titre de l'article 3, de mener leur enquête avec diligence et célérité (voir, mutatis mutandis, Lolayev c. Russie, no 58040/08, § 84, 15 janvier 2015 ; Aleksey Borisov c. Russie, no 12008/06 ; § 54, 16 juillet 2015).