Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MOVSESYAN v. ARMENIA

  Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.11.2017 - 27524/09

  This procedural obligation is not an obligation as to result but as to means only (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II).

  The Court reiterates in this respect that in cases involving a breach of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, which rank as the most fundamental provisions of the Convention, compensation for the non-pecuniary damage resulting from the breach should, in principle, be available as part of the range of redress (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 97, ECHR 2002-II, and Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, § 109, ECHR 2001-V).

• EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96

  CALVELLI ET CIGLIO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.11.2017 - 27524/09

  The Court reiterates that the procedural obligation under Article 2 requires States to set up an effective independent judicial system so that the cause of death of patients in the care of the medical profession, whether in the public or the private sector, can be determined and those responsible held accountable (see, among other authorities, Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 49, ECHR 2002-I, and Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V).
• EGMR, 04.05.2000 - 45305/99

  POWELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.11.2017 - 27524/09

  The Court reiterates that the procedural obligation under Article 2 requires States to set up an effective independent judicial system so that the cause of death of patients in the care of the medical profession, whether in the public or the private sector, can be determined and those responsible held accountable (see, among other authorities, Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 49, ECHR 2002-I, and Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V).

• EGMR, 28.11.2023 - 18269/18

  KRACHUNOVA v. BULGARIA

  As regards more specifically the domestic law governing the seeking and awarding of damages, the Court has already had occasion to hold that the fact that it is not possible (under the relevant domestic rules) to lodge claims for certain types of damages is in breach of Article 2 of the Convention (see Movsesyan v. Armenia, no. 27524/09, §§ 72-74, 16 November 2017; Sarishvili-Bolkvadze v. Georgia, no. 58240/08, §§ 94-97, 19 July 2018; and Vanyo Todorov v. Bulgaria, no. 31434/15, §§ 56-67, 21 July 2020).
• EGMR, 08.02.2022 - 5766/17

  BOTOYAN v. ARMENIA

  However, those measures are connected to employment regulations rather than the establishment of medical malpractice as such (see Movsesyan v. Armenia, no. 27524/09, § 71, 16 November 2017).
• EGMR, 16.01.2024 - 9235/13

  STANCHEV c. BULGARIE

  Contrairement à l'affaire précitée, il n'existait donc pas en l'espèce d'impossibilité absolue pour les membres de la famille les plus proches de prétendre à une indemnisation (voir également, à titre de comparaison, Movsesyan c. Arménie, no 27524/09, § 74, 16 novembre 2017, et Sarishvili-Bolkvadze c. Géorgie, no 58240/08, §§ 94-97, 19 juillet 2018, dans lesquels la Cour a constaté la violation de l'article 2 en raison de l'impossibilité totale de demander un dédommagement moral en cas de décès consécutif à une négligence médicale).

 
• EGMR, 21.07.2020 - 31434/15

  VANYO TODOROV c. BULGARIE

  Dans deux arrêts plus récents, Movsesyan c. Arménie (no 27524/09, 16 novembre 2017) et Sarishvili-Bolkvadze c. Géorgie (no 58240/08, 19 juillet 2018), qui portaient sur des décès survenus à la suite de négligences médicales, la Cour a en revanche constaté une violation de l'article 2 de la Convention en raison de l'impossibilité totale dans les systèmes juridiques en cause de chercher, de la part des médecins ou des établissements de santé responsables, une réparation du dommage moral consécutif au décès d'un proche (Movsesyan, précité, § 74, et Sarishvili-Bolkvadze, précité, §§ 94-97).
• EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 21648/11

  TRASKUNOVA v. RUSSIA

  It is thus unclear whether any such avenue was available to her and, if so, whether it would have achieved the result sought by Article 2 of the Convention by establishing the circumstances surrounding the death of the applicant's daughter, holding those responsible accountable and providing appropriate redress to the applicant (see Movsesyan v. Armenia, no. 27524/09, § 74, 16 November 2017, and Botoyan, cited above, § 94).
• EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 58240/08

  SARISHVILI-BOLKVADZE v. GEORGIA

  Against this background, the Court has previously noted that in cases involving a breach of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, which rank as the most fundamental provisions of the Convention, compensation for non-pecuniary damage resulting from the breach should, in principle, be available as part of the range of redress (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, §§ 97 and 101, ECHR 2002-II; Bubbins v. the United Kingdom, no. 50196/99, § 171, ECHR 2005-II (extracts); Reynolds v. the United Kingdom, no. 2694/08, §§ 65-68, 13 March 2012; and Movsesyan v. Armenia, no. 27524/09, § 73, 16 November 2017).
• EGMR, 25.03.2021 - 77238/16

  MEHMOOD c. GRÈCE

  Elle a aussi admis que lorsque des membres de certaines professions sont impliqués, des mesures disciplinaires peuvent également être envisagées (voir, entre autres, Nicolae Virgiliu Tanase c. Roumanie [GC], no 41720/13, § 159, 25 juin 2019, Movsesyan c. Arménie, no 27524/09, § 62, 16 novembre 2017, et la jurisprudence citée).