Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 35161/03 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,27330) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
LEITENDORFS v. LATVIA
Art. 2, Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. b, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. e, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 2, A... rt. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. a, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. e, Art. 7, Art. 7 Abs. 1, Art. 7 Abs. 2, Art. 9, Art. 9 Abs. 1, Art. 9 Abs. 2, Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 18, Art. 35, Art. 53, Art. 57 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 72286/01
MELNIK v. UKRAINE
Auszug aus EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 35161/03
The adequacy of the medical assistance is examined by taking into account various elements, such as, inter alia, timely diagnostics and treatment (see Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-06, 28 March 2006); and, where necessary, regular and systematic supervision aimed at preventing the aggravation of the prisoner's health condition (see Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 211, 13 July 2006, and, more recently, Krivosejs v. Latvia, no. 45517/04, § 71, 17 January 2012). - EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04
POPOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 35161/03
The adequacy of the medical assistance is examined by taking into account various elements, such as, inter alia, timely diagnostics and treatment (see Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-06, 28 March 2006); and, where necessary, regular and systematic supervision aimed at preventing the aggravation of the prisoner's health condition (see Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 211, 13 July 2006, and, more recently, Krivosejs v. Latvia, no. 45517/04, § 71, 17 January 2012). - EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 45517/04
KRIVOSEJS v. LATVIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 35161/03
The adequacy of the medical assistance is examined by taking into account various elements, such as, inter alia, timely diagnostics and treatment (see Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 104-06, 28 March 2006); and, where necessary, regular and systematic supervision aimed at preventing the aggravation of the prisoner's health condition (see Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 211, 13 July 2006, and, more recently, Krivosejs v. Latvia, no. 45517/04, § 71, 17 January 2012). - EGMR, 24.03.1988 - 10465/83
OLSSON v. SWEDEN (No. 1)
Auszug aus EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 35161/03
The Court, while concerned about the domestic regulation in force at the material time (see paragraph 9, above) cannot rule in abstracto on its compatibility with the Convention (see Olsson v. Sweden (no. 1), 24 March 1988, § 54, Series A no. 130) and in the circumstances, where the applicant has not provided any evidence in this respect, the Court is not prepared to make any inferences as to the existence of an arguable claim under Article 3.
- EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 19437/05
ANTONOVS v. LATVIA
The Court notes that in some cases against Latvia it has been able to scrutinise monitoring activity undertaken by the MADEKKI as regards the quality of medical care in prison (see Daģis v. Latvia (dec.), no. 7843/02, 20 June 2009; Krivosejs v. Latvia, no. 45517/04, 17 January 2012; Van Deilena v. Latvia (dec.), no. 50950/06, 15 May 2012; and Leitendorfs v. Latvia (dec.), no. 35161/03, 3 July 2012).