Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  OSAGIEDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  OSAGIEDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Zitiert selbst (5)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Einstufung des in französischer Haft zugefügten Übels als Folter - Verpflichtung …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.02.2023 - 228/20

  It is incumbent on the Government pleading non-exhaustion to satisfy the Court that a remedy was an effective one available in theory and in practice at the relevant time, that is to say that it was accessible, was capable of providing redress in respect of the applicant's complaints and offered reasonable prospects of success (see, in particular, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 76, ECHR 1999-V; Sejdovic v. Italy [GC], no. 56581/00, § 46, ECHR 2006-II; Vučković and Others v. Serbia (preliminary objection) [GC], no. 17153/11 and 29 others, § 74, 25 March 2014, and Gherghina v. Romania [GC] (dec.), no. 42219/07, § 85, 9 July 2015).
• EGMR, 18.09.2015 - 42219/07

  GHERGHINA c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.02.2023 - 228/20

  It is incumbent on the Government pleading non-exhaustion to satisfy the Court that a remedy was an effective one available in theory and in practice at the relevant time, that is to say that it was accessible, was capable of providing redress in respect of the applicant's complaints and offered reasonable prospects of success (see, in particular, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 76, ECHR 1999-V; Sejdovic v. Italy [GC], no. 56581/00, § 46, ECHR 2006-II; Vučković and Others v. Serbia (preliminary objection) [GC], no. 17153/11 and 29 others, § 74, 25 March 2014, and Gherghina v. Romania [GC] (dec.), no. 42219/07, § 85, 9 July 2015).
• EGMR, 22.05.2001 - 33592/96

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.02.2023 - 228/20

  It is true that the requirement for an applicant to exhaust domestic remedies is normally determined with reference to the date on which the application was lodged with the Court (see Baumann v. France, no. 33592/96, § 47, ECHR 2001-V (extracts)), although the Court has accepted that the last stage of domestic remedies may be reached after the application has been lodged but before its admissibility has been determined (see Molla Sali v. Greece [GC], no. 20452/14, § 90, 19 December 2018 and Karoussiotis v. Portugal, no. 23205/08, § 57, 1 February 2011).
• EGMR, 14.09.2017 - 41215/14

  NDIDI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.02.2023 - 228/20

  However, should the applicant be dissatisfied with the outcome of the ongoing domestic proceedings, and, in particular, should the domestic tribunals and courts fail to apply the relevant human rights standards consistently with the Convention and its case-law (see Ndidi v. the United Kingdom, no. 41215/14, § 76, 14 September 2017 and Unuane, cited above, § 76), it would be open to him to reintroduce his complaint under Article 8 of the Convention.
• EGMR, 24.11.2020 - 80343/17

  UNUANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.02.2023 - 228/20

  On 14 January 2019, applying section 117C(3)-(5) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (as amended) and paragraph 399 of the Immigration Rules HC 395 (as amended), the Upper Tribunal substituted a determination dismissing the appeal on the basis that the evidence did not establish either that it would be unduly harsh for the applicant's wife and children to remain in the United Kingdom without him, or that there existed "very compelling circumstances" capable of outweighing the public interest in deportation (see Unuane v. the United Kingdom, no. 80343/17, 24 November 2020).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• LSG Nordrhein-Westfalen, 26.08.2026 - L 11 SF 178/25
  Antrag im einstweiligen Rechtsschutz (im Rahmen des Hauptsacheverfahrens S 22 SB 228/20 gestellt).

  Weiterer Antrag auf Akteneinsicht in S 22 SB 228/20.