Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LITVINOV v. RUSSIA

  No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 13 - Right to an effective remedy (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (13)Zitiert selbst (26)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 27.11.2012 - 41461/10

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  It found, in particular, that in deciding on a complaint concerning breaches of domestic regulations governing the provision of medical care to detainees, the prison authorities would not have a sufficiently independent standpoint to satisfy the requirements of Article 35 of the Convention (see Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, § 75, 27 November 2012 and Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, § 79, 13 November 2012).

  In the absence of an effective remedy to air complaints of inadequate medical services afforded to inmates, the Court may find itself obliged to perform a first-hand evaluation of evidence before it to determine whether the guarantees of Articles 2 or 3 of the Convention have been respected (see Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, 13 November 2012; Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012; Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, 8 January 2013; Mkhitaryan v. Russia, no. 46108/11, 5 February 2013; Gurenko v. Russia, no. 41828/10, 5 February 2013; Bubnov v. Russia, no. 76317/11, 5 February 2013; Budanov v. Russia, no. 66583/11, 9 January 2014, and Gorelov v. Russia, no. 49072/11, 9 January 2014; Amirov v. Russia, no. 51857/13, 27 November 2014, § 90).

• EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  Having assessed a civil claim for compensation under the tort provisions of the Civil Code, the Court considered that such a claim could not offer an applicant any other redress than a purely compensatory award, and could not put an end to a situation where there was an ongoing violation, such as inadequate medical care (see Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, §§ 65-73, 8 January 2013).

  In the absence of an effective remedy to air complaints of inadequate medical services afforded to inmates, the Court may find itself obliged to perform a first-hand evaluation of evidence before it to determine whether the guarantees of Articles 2 or 3 of the Convention have been respected (see Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, 13 November 2012; Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012; Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, 8 January 2013; Mkhitaryan v. Russia, no. 46108/11, 5 February 2013; Gurenko v. Russia, no. 41828/10, 5 February 2013; Bubnov v. Russia, no. 76317/11, 5 February 2013; Budanov v. Russia, no. 66583/11, 9 January 2014, and Gorelov v. Russia, no. 49072/11, 9 January 2014; Amirov v. Russia, no. 51857/13, 27 November 2014, § 90).

• EGMR, 13.11.2012 - 24677/10

  KORYAK v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  It found, in particular, that in deciding on a complaint concerning breaches of domestic regulations governing the provision of medical care to detainees, the prison authorities would not have a sufficiently independent standpoint to satisfy the requirements of Article 35 of the Convention (see Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, § 75, 27 November 2012 and Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, § 79, 13 November 2012).

  In the absence of an effective remedy to air complaints of inadequate medical services afforded to inmates, the Court may find itself obliged to perform a first-hand evaluation of evidence before it to determine whether the guarantees of Articles 2 or 3 of the Convention have been respected (see Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, 13 November 2012; Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012; Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, 8 January 2013; Mkhitaryan v. Russia, no. 46108/11, 5 February 2013; Gurenko v. Russia, no. 41828/10, 5 February 2013; Bubnov v. Russia, no. 76317/11, 5 February 2013; Budanov v. Russia, no. 66583/11, 9 January 2014, and Gorelov v. Russia, no. 49072/11, 9 January 2014; Amirov v. Russia, no. 51857/13, 27 November 2014, § 90).

• EGMR, 05.02.2013 - 41828/10

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  This has been sufficient for the Court on many occasions to dismiss a Government's objection of non-exhaustion (see, for instance, Gurenko v. Russia, no. 41828/10, § 78, 5 February 2013).

  In the absence of an effective remedy to air complaints of inadequate medical services afforded to inmates, the Court may find itself obliged to perform a first-hand evaluation of evidence before it to determine whether the guarantees of Articles 2 or 3 of the Convention have been respected (see Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, 13 November 2012; Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012; Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, 8 January 2013; Mkhitaryan v. Russia, no. 46108/11, 5 February 2013; Gurenko v. Russia, no. 41828/10, 5 February 2013; Bubnov v. Russia, no. 76317/11, 5 February 2013; Budanov v. Russia, no. 66583/11, 9 January 2014, and Gorelov v. Russia, no. 49072/11, 9 January 2014; Amirov v. Russia, no. 51857/13, 27 November 2014, § 90).

• EGMR, 26.10.2006 - 59696/00

  KHUDOBIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  The Court reiterates in this regard that even though Article 3 does not entitle a detainee to be released "on compassionate grounds", it has always interpreted the requirement to assure the health and well-being of detainees as an obligation on the part of the State to provide detainees with the requisite medical assistance (see Kudła, cited above, § 94; Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, § 96, ECHR 2006-XII (extracts); and Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 95, ECHR 2002-VI).
• EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04

  POPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  The State must ensure that a person is detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure of deprivation of liberty do not subject him to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, his health and well-being are adequately secured (see Kudła, cited above, §§ 92-94, and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 208, 13 July 2006).
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

  SARBAN v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  The Court insists, in particular, that authorities must ensure that diagnosis and care are prompt and accurate (see Khatayev v. Russia, no. 56994/09, § 85, 11 October 2011; Yevgeniy Alekseyenko, cited above, § 100; Gladkiy v. Russia, no. 3242/03, § 84, 21 December 2010; Hummatov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 9852/03 and 13413/04, § 115, 29 November 2007; Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-06, 28 March 2006; and, mutatis mutandis, Holomiov v. Moldova, no. 30649/05, § 121, 7 November 2006) and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at successfully treating the detainee's health problems or preventing their aggravation (see Hummatov, cited above, §§ 109 and 114, and Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 79, 4 October 2005).
• EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 72286/01

  MELNIK v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  The Court insists, in particular, that authorities must ensure that diagnosis and care are prompt and accurate (see Khatayev v. Russia, no. 56994/09, § 85, 11 October 2011; Yevgeniy Alekseyenko, cited above, § 100; Gladkiy v. Russia, no. 3242/03, § 84, 21 December 2010; Hummatov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 9852/03 and 13413/04, § 115, 29 November 2007; Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-06, 28 March 2006; and, mutatis mutandis, Holomiov v. Moldova, no. 30649/05, § 121, 7 November 2006) and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at successfully treating the detainee's health problems or preventing their aggravation (see Hummatov, cited above, §§ 109 and 114, and Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 79, 4 October 2005).
• EGMR, 07.11.2006 - 30649/05

  HOLOMIOV v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  The Court insists, in particular, that authorities must ensure that diagnosis and care are prompt and accurate (see Khatayev v. Russia, no. 56994/09, § 85, 11 October 2011; Yevgeniy Alekseyenko, cited above, § 100; Gladkiy v. Russia, no. 3242/03, § 84, 21 December 2010; Hummatov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 9852/03 and 13413/04, § 115, 29 November 2007; Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-06, 28 March 2006; and, mutatis mutandis, Holomiov v. Moldova, no. 30649/05, § 121, 7 November 2006) and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at successfully treating the detainee's health problems or preventing their aggravation (see Hummatov, cited above, §§ 109 and 114, and Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 79, 4 October 2005).
• EGMR, 21.12.2010 - 3242/03

  GLADKIY v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 32863/13

  The Court insists, in particular, that authorities must ensure that diagnosis and care are prompt and accurate (see Khatayev v. Russia, no. 56994/09, § 85, 11 October 2011; Yevgeniy Alekseyenko, cited above, § 100; Gladkiy v. Russia, no. 3242/03, § 84, 21 December 2010; Hummatov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 9852/03 and 13413/04, § 115, 29 November 2007; Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-06, 28 March 2006; and, mutatis mutandis, Holomiov v. Moldova, no. 30649/05, § 121, 7 November 2006) and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at successfully treating the detainee's health problems or preventing their aggravation (see Hummatov, cited above, §§ 109 and 114, and Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 79, 4 October 2005).
• EGMR, 04.10.2011 - 47729/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 27.11.2014 - 51857/13

  AMIROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 11.10.2011 - 56994/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 09.01.2014 - 66583/11

  BUDANOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 2447/05

  CARA-DAMIANI c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 05.02.2013 - 46108/11

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 09.01.2014 - 49072/11

  GORELOV (II) v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 05.02.2013 - 76317/11

  BUBNOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02

  Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 11138/10

  Transnistrien
• EGMR, 19.03.1991 - 11069/84
• EGMR, 18.09.2015 - 42219/07

  GHERGHINA c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 24.07.2008 - 41461/02

  VLADIMIR ROMANOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7654/76
• EGMR, 10.04.2008 - 21071/05

  WASSERMAN v. RUSSIA (No. 2)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 08.09.2026 - 64510/17
  The Court insists, in particular, that authorities must ensure that diagnosis and care are prompt and accurate (see Sadretdinov v. Russia, no. 17564/06, § 67, 24 May 2016; Vasenin v. Russia, no. 48023/06, § 93, 21 June 2016; and G. v. Russia, no. 42526/07, § 79, 21 June 2016) and that - where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition - supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at successfully treating the detainee's health problems or preventing their aggravation (see Ivko v. Russia, no. 30575/08, § 94, 15 December 2015; Kolesnikovich v. Russia, no. 44694/13, § 70, 22 March 2016; Litvinov v. Russia, no. 32863/13, § 86, 22 March 2016; and Fernandez Iradi v. France, no. 23421/21, §§ 52-55, 4 December 2025).
• EGMR, 12.12.2018 - 1439/06

  A.B. CONTRE LA RUSSIE ET 135 AUTRES AFFAIRES

  32863/13.
• EGMR, 03.02.2026 - 4743/21

  Russland wegen Nawalny-Inhaftierung verurteilt: "Muster der Missachtung von …

  The Court has on many occasions established that there are no effective domestic remedies in Russia in respect of complaining about the poor quality of medical treatment in detention (see, among many other authorities, Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, §§ 86-93, 13 November 2012; Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, §§ 62-80, 8 January 2013; Litvinov v. Russia, no. 32863/13, §§ 78-81, 22 March 2016; and Maylenskiy v. Russia, no. 12646/15, § 44, 4 October 2016).

• EGMR, 02.06.2020 - 61582/10

  SOLODNIKOV v. RUSSIA

  For a summary of the relevant general principles, see Litvinov v. Russia, no. 32863/13, §§ 73-77, 22 March 2016.
• EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 24051/11

  [ENG]

  The Court has on many occasions established that there is a lack of effective domestic remedies to complain of the quality of medical treatment in detention (see, among many other authorities, Makshakov v. Russia, no. 52526/07, §§ 86-89, 24 May 2016; Litvinov v. Russia, no. 32863/13, §§ 78-81, 22 March 2016; Kolesnikovich v. Russia, no. 44694/13, §§ 63-66, 22 March 2016; Ivko, cited above, §§ 85-88, Gorbulya v. Russia, no. 31535/09, §§ 56-58, 6 March 2014; Reshetnyak, cited above, §§ 65-73; Dirdizov, cited above, § 75; and Koryak, cited above, §§ 86-93).
• EGMR, 25.03.2021 - 38718/16

  ALEKSANDROVSKAYA v. UKRAINE

  However, the Court also notes that those recommendations made in the first two sets of Dr N.'s conclusions were not repeated in the third set of conclusions (see, similarly, Litvinov v. Russia, no. 32863/13, § 92, 22 March 2016).
• EGMR, 30.11.2017 - 38777/04

  [ENG]

  The Court has already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see Khayletdinov v. Russia, no. 2763/13, §§ 71-78, 12 January 2016; Ivko v. Russia, no. 30575/08, §§ 104-12, 15 December 2015; Litvinov v. Russia, no. 32863/13, §§ 90-96, 22 March 2016; Khloyev v. Russia, no. 46404/13, §§ 80-88, 5 February 2015; and Budanov v. Russia, no. 66583/11, §§ 68-76, 9 January 2014).
• EGMR, 19.06.2018 - 61744/11

  GULEVICH c. RUSSIE

  Elle remarque cependant qu'aucun médecin n'a suggéré d'opérer la requérante en urgence ou rapidement avant le mois d'août 2011 (voir, également, Litvinov c. Russie, no 32863/13, § 95, 22 mars 2016, et comparer avec G. c. Russie, no 42526/07, 21 juin 2016 (affaire dans laquelle les autorités internes avaient accusé un retard injustifié de plus d'un an pour faire opérer le requérant, alors que les médecins des hôpitaux civils avaient insisté pour que celui-ci fût opéré de manière urgente)).
• EGMR, 28.06.2018 - 1484/16

  IZYUROV AND KUKHARCHUK v. RUSSIA

  The Court has already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see Khayletdinov v. Russia, no. 2763/13, §§ 71-78, 12 January 2016; Ivko v. Russia, no. 30575/08, §§ 104-12, 15 December 2015; Litvinov v. Russia, no. 32863/13, §§ 90-96, 22 March 2016; Khloyev v. Russia, no. 46404/13, §§ 80-88, 5 February 2015; and Budanov v. Russia, no. 66583/11, §§ 68-76, 9 January 2014).
• EGMR, 14.12.2017 - 70371/13

  KOROTEYEV AND SITARSKIY v. RUSSIA

  The Court has already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see Yankovskiy v. Russia, no. 24051/11, §§ 63-65, 25 July 2017; Khayletdinov v. Russia, no. 2763/13, §§ 71-78, 12 January 2016; Ivko v. Russia, no. 30575/08, §§ 104-12, 15 December 2015; Litvinov v. Russia, no. 32863/13, §§ 90-96, 22 March 2016; Khloyev v. Russia, no. 46404/13, §§ 80-88, 5 February 2015; and Budanov v. Russia, no. 66583/11, §§ 68-76, 9 January 2014).
• EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 62812/12

  BULAVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.06.2017 - 33690/12

  BALKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.06.2017 - 51252/09

  BARSUKOV v. RUSSIA