Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SHANAGHAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 36, Art. 36 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 2 No violation of Art. 14 No violation of Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 04.04.2000 - 37715/97
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 37715/97

Wird zitiert von ... (19)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 37715/97

  The object and purpose of the Convention as an instrument for the protection of individual human beings also requires that Article 2 be interpreted and applied so as to make its safeguards practical and effective (see the McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom judgment of 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324, pp. 45-46, §§ 146-147).
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 37715/97

  A requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition is implicit in this context (see the Yasa v. Turkey judgment of 2 September 1998, Reports 1998-IV, pp. 2439-2440, §§ 102-104; Cakıcı v. Turkey cited above, §§ 80, 87 and 106; Tanrikulu v. Turkey, cited above, § 109; Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, [Section I] ECHR 2000-III, §§ 106-107).
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 37715/97

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC] no. 21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII, § 100, and also Çakıcı v. Turkey, [GC] ECHR 1999- IV, § 85, Ertak v. Turkey no. 20764/92 [Section 1] ECHR 2000-V, § 32 and Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94 [Section 1] ECHR 2000-VI, § 82).
• EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23763/94

  TANRIKULU c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 37715/97

  The authorities must have taken the reasonable steps available to them to secure the evidence concerning the incident, including inter alia eye witness testimony, forensic evidence and, where appropriate, an autopsy which provides a complete and accurate record of injury and an objective analysis of clinical findings, including the cause of death (see concerning autopsies, e.g. Salman v. Turkey cited above, § 106; concerning witnesses e.g. Tanrıkulu v. Turkey [GC], no. 23763/94, ECHR 1999-IV, § 109; concerning forensic evidence e.g. Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, [Section 4], § 89).
• EGMR, 14.12.2000 - 22676/93

  GÜL v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 37715/97

  The authorities must have taken the reasonable steps available to them to secure the evidence concerning the incident, including inter alia eye witness testimony, forensic evidence and, where appropriate, an autopsy which provides a complete and accurate record of injury and an objective analysis of clinical findings, including the cause of death (see concerning autopsies, e.g. Salman v. Turkey cited above, § 106; concerning witnesses e.g. Tanrıkulu v. Turkey [GC], no. 23763/94, ECHR 1999-IV, § 109; concerning forensic evidence e.g. Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, [Section 4], § 89).

• EGMR, 07.07.2011 - 55721/07

  Britische Soldaten sollen Kriegsverbrechen begangen haben

  Toutefois, l'enquête doit également être suffisamment vaste pour permettre aux autorités qui en sont chargées de prendre en considération non seulement les actes des agents de l'Etat qui ont directement eu recours à la force meurtrière mais aussi l'ensemble des circonstances les ayant entourés, notamment le cadre juridique ou réglementaire en vigueur ainsi que la préparation des opérations en cours et le contrôle exercé sur elles, au cas où ces éléments seraient nécessaires pour déterminer si l'Etat a satisfait ou non à l'obligation que l'article 2 fait peser sur lui de protéger la vie (voir, par implication, McCann, précité, §§ 150 et 162 ; Hugh Jordan c. Royaume-Uni, no 24746/94, § 128, CEDH 2001-III (extraits) ; McKerr, précité, §§ 143 et 151 ; Shanaghan c. Royaume-Uni, no 37715/97, §§ 100-125, 4 mai 2001 ; Finucane c. Royaume-Uni, no 29178/95, §§ 77-78, CEDH 2003-VIII ; Natchova, précité, §§ 114-115, ainsi que, mutatis mutandis, Tzekov c. Bulgarie, no 45500/99, § 71, 23 février 2006).
• EGMR, 25.01.2022 - 28864/18

  GRIBBEN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Relevant Committee of Ministers Resolutions 93. In addition to its earlier judgment in the present case (McCaughey and Others, cited above), the Court has adopted seven other judgments concerning the investigation of killings by security forces in Northern Ireland between 1968 and 1998 (see Hugh Jordan, cited above; McKerr v. the United Kingdom, no. 28883/95, ECHR 2001-III; Shanaghan v. the United Kingdom, no. 37715/97, 4 May 2001; Kelly and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 30054/96, 4 May 2001; McShane v. the United Kingdom, no. 43290/98, 28 May 2002; Finucane v. the United Kingdom, no. 29178/95, ECHR 2003-VIII; and Hemsworth v. the United Kingdom, no. 58559/09, 16 July 2013).

  As already indicated, the Court would normally assess compliance with the duty to investigate under Article 2 of the Convention by carrying out a global assessment of all the investigatory steps that have been taken and, indeed, this was the approach taken in Hugh Jordan, McKerr, Kelly and Others (all cited above), Shanaghan v. the United Kingdom, no. 37715/97, 4 May 2001, McShane v. the United Kingdom, no. 43290/98, 28 May 2002, and Finucane v. the United Kingdom, no. 29178/95, ECHR 2003-VIII. It is clear from the Court's judgment in McCaughey and Others that the applicants had expressly complained about the entirely of the investigative steps taken, including the investigation by the RUC and the decisions taken by the DPP (see McCaughey and Others, cited above, §§ 105-106).

• EGMR, 01.07.2003 - 29178/95

  FINUCANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Le Gouvernement reconnaît qu'à la lumière des arrêts précédemment rendus par la Cour (Hugh Jordan c. Royaume-Uni, no 24746/94, 4 mai 2001, McKerr c. Royaume-Uni, no 28883/95, CEDH 2001-III, Kelly et autres c. Royaume-Uni, no 30054/96, 4 mai 2001, et Shanaghan c. Royaume-Uni, no 37715/97, 4 mai 2001), l'enquête menée par la RUC, l'enquête judiciaire et les enquêtes Stevens ne répondent pas, prises ensemble, aux exigences procédurales découlant de l'article 2 de la Convention.

 
• EGMR, 06.02.2007 - 23458/02

  GIULIANI c. ITALIE

  Même à supposer l'existence d'un tel recours, permettant aux requérants de faire établir les responsabilités de l'Etat pour la mort de Carlo Giuliani Giuliani, la Cour estime que, dans les circonstances particulières du cas d'espèce, il serait déraisonnable de demander aux requérants de se prévaloir dudit recours, et d'en attendre l'issue pour se livrer à l'examen du volet substantiel de l'affaire (voir, mutatis mutandis, Shanaghan c. Royaume-Uni, no 37715/97, §§ 95-99, 4 mai 2001).
• EGMR, 16.11.2017 - 73974/14

  TSALIKIDIS AND OTHERS v. GREECE

  The present case should therefore be distinguished from cases involving the alleged use of lethal force either by agents of the State or by private parties with their collusion (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324; Shanaghan v. the United Kingdom, no. 37715/97, § 90, 4 May 2001; Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, ECHR 2002-IV; Nachova and Others, cited above; and Ognyanova and Choban v. Bulgaria, no. 46317/99, 23 February 2006) and cases in which the factual circumstances imposed an obligation on the authorities to protect an individual's life, for example where they had assumed responsibility for his or her welfare (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, ECHR 2002-II) or where they knew or ought to have known that his life was at risk (see Osman v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII).
• EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 58559/09

  HEMSWORTH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  On 7 June 2001 the Coroner opened a pre-inquest hearing, in 16 cases including into John Hemsworth's death, to hear submissions on the implications of the judgments of this Court of 4 May 2001 in certain cases concerning deaths in Northern Ireland (Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, (extracts); McKerr v. the United Kingdom, no. 28883/95, both in ECHR 2001-III; Shanaghan v. the United Kingdom, no. 37715/97; and Kelly and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 30054/96).
• EGMR, 27.04.2010 - 23039/02

  WEBER ET AUTRES c. POLOGNE

  La présente espèce doit être distinguée des affaires dénonçant un recours à la force meurtrière par des agents de l'Etat ou par des particuliers avec la complicité d'agents de l'Etat (voir, par exemple, McCann et autres c. Royaume-Uni, arrêt du 27 septembre 1995, série A no 324, Hugh Jordan c. Royaume-Uni, no 24746/94, arrêt du 4 mai 2001, CEDH 2001-III (extraits), Shanaghan c. Royaume-Uni, no 37715/97, arrêt du 4 mai 2001, CEDH 2001-III (extraits)), de celles dans lesquelles les circonstances de fait imposaient aux autorités de protéger la vie d'un individu, au motif par exemple qu'elles étaient responsables de son bien-être (voir, par exemple, Paul et Audrey Edwards c. Royaume-Uni, no 46477/99, arrêt du 14 mars 2002, CEDH 2002-II), et de celles, enfin, dans lesquelles les autorités savaient - ou auraient dû savoir - que la vie de la personne était en jeu (voir, par exemple, Osman c. Royaume-Uni, arrêt du 28 octobre 1998, Recueil des arrêts et décisions 1998-VIII).
• EGMR, 12.01.2010 - 44936/04

  BABAT AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  The Court reiterates the basic principles laid down in its judgments concerning a State's obligations under Article 2 of the Convention under both its substantive and procedural limbs (see, in particular, McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, §§ 146-147, Series A no. 324; Buldan v. Turkey, no. 28298/95, §§ 73-75, 20 April 2004; Ülkü Ekinci v. Turkey, no. 27602/95, §§ 135-136, 16 July 2002; Shanaghan v. the United Kingdom, no. 37715/97, §§ 85-92, 4 May 2001; Finucane v. the United Kingdom, no. 29178/95, §§ 67-71, ECHR 2003-VIII; Ramsahai and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 52391/99, § 321, ECHR 2007-..., and Dölek v. Turkey, no. 39541/98, §§ 70-75, 2 October 2007).
• EGMR, 14.05.2009 - 21810/03

  TAYSUMOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  In all cases, however, the next of kin of the victim must be involved in the procedure to the extent necessary to safeguard his or her legitimate interests (see Shanaghan v. the United Kingdom, no. 37715/97, §§ 91-92, 4 May 2001).
• EGMR, 12.02.2009 - 7654/02

  AYUBOV v. RUSSIA

  In all cases, however, the next of kin of the victim must be involved in the procedure to the extent necessary to safeguard his or her legitimate interests (see Shanaghan v. the United Kingdom, no. 37715/97, §§ 91-92, 4 May 2001).
• EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 27183/03

  ZAURBEKOVA AND ZAURBEKOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 04.12.2008 - 27243/03

  MUSIKHANOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 09.10.2008 - 22057/02

  YUSUPOVA AND ZAURBEKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 25.09.2008 - 67326/01

  MEZHIDOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.01.2008 - 5108/02

  KHATSIYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 09.02.2010 - 58933/00

  ADIYAMAN v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 05.03.2009 - 39166/04

  KHALITOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 05.01.2010 - 13752/06

  BOZTAS AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 20.05.2003 - 10231/02

  ZAMULA and OTHERS v. UKRAINE

Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SHANAGHAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
  Admissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 04.04.2000 - 37715/97
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 37715/97

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.04.2000 - 37715/97

  As regards the procedural requirement that the State carry out an effective investigation into deaths caused by its agents (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 18984/91, § 161, ECHR 1995-III), the parties differ as to the scope of the obligation and, in particular, as to whether civil proceedings are of any relevance, depending as they do on the initiative of the deceased's relatives who have to establish their claims to a certain standard of proof.
• EGMR, 18.12.1996 - 21987/93

  AKSOY c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.04.2000 - 37715/97

  Article 35 § 1 also requires that the complaints intended to be brought subsequently before the Court should have been made to the appropriate domestic body, at least in substance and in compliance with the formal requirements laid down in domestic law, but not that recourse should be had to remedies which are inadequate or ineffective (see Aksoy v. Turkey, no. 21987/93, §§ 51-52, ECHR 1996-VI, and Akdivar and Others v. Turkey, no. 21893/93, §§ 65-67, ECHR 1996-IV).