Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BEKIRSKI v. BULGARIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 38, Art. 38 Abs. 1, Art. 38 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 38 No violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violations of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 2 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 2 (procedural aspect) Pecuniary damage and non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01
• EGMR, 08.02.2017 - 71420/01

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (11)

• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95

  McKERR c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  The Court is sensitive to the subsidiary nature of its role and must be cautious in taking on the role of a first-instance tribunal of fact, where this is not rendered unavoidable by the circumstances of a particular case (see, for example, McKerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 28883/95, 4 April 2000).

  In conclusion, the applicants stated that, by not conducting an effective investigation, capable of identifying and punishing those responsible for Mr Bekirski's death, the authorities had failed to adhere to the rule of law and to prevent the appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts (see McKerr v. the United Kingdom, no. 28883/95, § 114, ECHR 2001-III).

• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  The Court does not deem it necessary to make a separate finding under Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the deficiencies in the investigation (see Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 120, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97

  ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  The relevant principles have been summarised in the Court's judgment in the case of Anguelova v. Bulgaria (no. 38361/97, §§ 136-40, ECHR 2002-IV).

 
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  However, having regard to the reasons for which it found a breach of the State's procedural obligations under Article 2 (see paragraphs 172-76 above), the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine whether there has also been a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with either of Articles 2 or 3 (see, among other authorities, Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 123, ECHR 2005 VII and Makaratzis, cited above, § 86).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  In respect of persons deprived of their liberty, recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by their own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 99, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  Article 3, meanwhile, prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances and the victim's behaviour (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  In this context, it is incumbent on the State to account for any injuries suffered in custody, an obligation which is particularly stringent where an individual dies (see, for example, Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 99, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89

  KLAAS c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  Where domestic proceedings have taken place, it is not the Court's task to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts and, as a general rule, it is for those courts to assess the evidence before them (see Klaas v. Germany, 22 September 1993, § 29, Series A no. 269).
• EGMR, 03.06.2004 - 33097/96

  BATI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  Finally, the Court reiterates, in line with its settled case law, that it remains free to make its own assessment in the light of all the material before it (see Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 113, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts), and, mutatis mutandis, Selmouni, cited above, § 86).
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.09.2010 - 71420/01

  A failure on a Government's part to submit such information which is in their hands without a satisfactory explanation may not only give rise to the drawing of inferences as to the well-foundedness of the applicants' allegations, but may also reflect negatively on the level of compliance by a respondent State with its obligations under Article 38 § 1 (a) of the Convention (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, §§ 66 and 70, ECHR 2000-VI).
• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 57834/00

  KABLAN contre la TURQUIE