Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  FIORENZA c. ITALIE

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  Violation de l'art. 6-1 Non-lieu à examiner P1-1 Dommage matériel - demande rejetée Préjudice moral - réparation pécuniaire Frais et dépens (procédure nationale) - demande rejetée Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure de la Convention ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 28.11.2000 - 44393/98
• EGMR, 06.12.2001 - 44393/98

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 34884/97

  BOTTAZZI c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.12.2001 - 44393/98

  La Cour rappelle avoir constaté dans de nombreux arrêts (voir, par exemple, Bottazzi c. Italie [GC], n° 34884/97, § 22, CEDH 1999-V) l'existence en Italie d'une pratique contraire à la Convention résultant d'une accumulation de manquements à l'exigence du «délai raisonnable».

• EGMR, 17.03.2016 - 23796/10

  VASILEVA v. BULGARIA

  It is now well established that although the right to health is not as such among the rights guaranteed under the Convention or its Protocols (see Fiorenza v. Italy (dec.), no. 44393/98, 28 November 2000; Pastorino and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 17640/02, 11 July 2006; and Dossi and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 26053/07, 12 October 2010), the High Contracting Parties have, parallel to their positive obligations under Article 2 of the Convention, a positive obligation under its Article 8, firstly, to have in place regulations compelling both public and private hospitals to adopt appropriate measures for the protection of their patients" physical integrity and, secondly, to provide victims of medical negligence access to proceedings in which they could, in appropriate cases, obtain compensation for damage (see Trocellier v. France (dec.), no. 75725/01, ECHR 2006-XIV; Benderskiy v. Ukraine, no. 22750/02, §§ 61-62, 15 November 2007; Codarcea v. Romania, no. 31675/04, §§ 102-03, 2 June 2009; Yardimci v. Turkey, no. 25266/05, §§ 55-57, 5 January 2010; Spyra and Kranczkowski v. Poland, no. 19764/07, §§ 82 and 86-87, 25 September 2012; Csoma v. Romania, no. 8759/05, §§ 41 and 43, 15 January 2013; and S.B. v. Romania, no. 24453/04, §§ 65-66, 23 September 2014).
• EGMR, 08.02.2022 - 5766/17

  BOTOYAN v. ARMENIA

  It is now well established that although the right to health is not as such among the rights guaranteed under the Convention or its Protocols (see Fiorenza v. Italy (dec.), no. 44393/98, 28 November 2000; Pastorino and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 17640/02, 11 July 2006; and Dossi and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 26053/07, 12 October 2010), the High Contracting Parties have, parallel to their positive obligations under Article 2 of the Convention, a positive obligation under Article 8, firstly, to have in place regulations compelling both public and private hospitals to adopt appropriate measures for the protection of their patients' physical integrity and, secondly, to provide victims of medical negligence with access to proceedings in which they can, where appropriate, obtain compensation for damage (see Trocellier v. France (dec.), no. 75725/01, ECHR 2006-XIV; Codarcea v. Romania, no. 31675/04, §§ 102 and 103, 2 June 2009; Spyra and Kranczkowski v. Poland, no. 19764/07, §§ 82 and 86-87, 25 September 2012; Csoma v. Romania, no. 8759/05, §§ 41 and 43, 15 January 2013; and S.B. v. Romania, no. 24453/04, §§ 65-66, 23 September 2014).
• EGMR, 10.11.2020 - 62007/17

  L.F. v. IRELAND

  It is now well established that although the right to health is not as such among the rights guaranteed under the Convention or its Protocols (see Fiorenza v. Italy (dec.), no. 44393/98, 28 November 2000; Pastorino and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 17640/02, 11 July 2006; and Dossi and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 26053/07, 12 October 2010), the High Contracting Parties have, parallel to their positive obligations under Article 2 of the Convention, a positive obligation under Article 8, firstly, to have in place regulations compelling both public and private hospitals to adopt appropriate measures for the protection of their patients" physical integrity and, secondly, to provide victims of medical negligence access to proceedings in which they could, in appropriate cases, obtain compensation for damage (see Trocellier v. France (dec.), no. 75725/01, ECHR 2006-XIV; Benderskiy v. Ukraine, no. 22750/02, §§ 61-62, 15 November 2007; Codarcea v. Romania, no. 31675/04, §§ 102-03, 2 June 2009; Yardimci v. Turkey, no. 25266/05, §§ 55-57, 5 January 2010; Spyra and Kranczkowski v. Poland, no. 19764/07, §§ 82 and 86-87, 25 September 2012; Csoma v. Romania, no. 8759/05, §§ 41 and 43, 15 January 2013; and S.B. v. Romania, no. 24453/04, §§ 65-66, 23 September 2014).