Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PENTIACOVA ET AUTRES c. MOLDOVA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 13, Art. 14 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PENTIACOVA AND OTHERS v. MOLDOVA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 13, Art. 14 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (30)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 9310/81

  POWELL ET RAYNER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2005 - 14462/03

  A complaint is characterised by the facts alleged in it and not merely by the legal grounds or arguments relied on (see the Powell and Rayner v. the United Kingdom judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 172, p. 13, § 29).

  As the Court has consistently held (see, among other authorities, Powell and Rayner v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 12 February 1990, Series A no. 172, pp. 14-15, § 33, and Abdurrahman Orak v. Turkey, no. 31889/96, § 97, 14 February 2002), Article 13 of the Convention guarantees the availability at national level of a remedy to enforce the substance of the Convention rights and freedoms in whatever form they may happen to be secured in the domestic legal order.

• EGMR, 04.05.2000 - 45305/99

  POWELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2005 - 14462/03

  It cannot be excluded that the acts and omissions of the authorities in the field of health care policy may in certain circumstances engage their responsibility under Article 2 (see Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V).
• EGMR, 21.03.2002 - 65653/01

  NITECKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2005 - 14462/03

  Moreover, an issue may arise under Article 2 where it is shown that the authorities of a Contracting State put an individual's life at risk through the denial of health care which they have undertaken to make available to the population generally (see Cyprus v. Turkey [GC], no. 25781/94, § 219, ECHR 2001-IV and Nitecki v. Poland (dec.), no. 65653/01, 21 March 2002).

 
• EGMR, 14.05.2002 - 38621/97

  ZEHNALOVÁ ET ZEHNAL c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2005 - 14462/03

  In both contexts regard must be had to the fair balance that has to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and the community as a whole, and in both contexts the State enjoys a certain margin of appreciation (Zehnalová and Zehnal v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 38621/97, ECHR 2002-V).
• EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13710/88

  NIEMIETZ v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2005 - 14462/03

  The Court has previously held that private life includes a person's physical and psychological integrity (Niemietz v. Germany, judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 251-B, § 29).
• EGMR, 28.11.1984 - 8777/79

  RASMUSSEN v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.01.2005 - 14462/03

  It safeguards persons (including legal persons) who are "placed in analogous situations" against discriminatory differences of treatment; and, for the purposes of Article 14, a difference of treatment is discriminatory if it "has no objective and reasonable justification", that is, if it does not pursue a "legitimate aim" or if there is not a "reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be realised" (see, amongst many authorities, the Rasmussen v. Denmark judgment of 28 November 1984, Series A no. 87, § 35 and § 38).

• EGMR, 16.12.2010 - 25579/05

  A, B und C ./. Irland

  La Cour a conclu dans des affaires précédentes que les Etats avaient l'obligation positive de garantir à leurs citoyens le droit à un respect effectif de leur intégrité physique et morale (Glass c. Royaume-Uni, no 61827/00, §§ 74-83, CEDH-2004-II ; Sentges c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no27677/02, 8 juillet 2003 ; Pentiacova et autres c. Moldova (déc.), no 14462/03, CEDH 2005-I ; Nitecki c. Pologne (déc.), no 65653/01, 21 mars 2002 ; Odièvre, précité, § 42).
• EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 5410/03

  TYSIAC c. POLOGNE

  De plus, si la Convention ne garantit pas en tant que tel le droit à un niveau particulier de soins médicaux, la Cour a dit précédemment que la vie privée recouvre l'intégrité physique et morale de la personne et que l'Etat a également l'obligation positive de reconnaître à ses ressortissants le droit au respect effectif de cette intégrité (Glass c. Royaume-Uni, no 61827/00, §§ 74-83, CEDH 2004-II, Sentges c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 27677/02, 8 juillet 2003, Pentiacova et autres c. Moldova (déc.), no 14462/03, CEDH 2005-I, Nitecki c. Pologne (déc.), no 65653/01, 21 mars 2002, Odièvre c. France [GC], no 42326/98, CEDH 2003-III, mutatis mutandis).
• EGMR, 16.07.2014 - 37359/09

  HÄMÄLÄINEN c. FINLANDE

  La Cour a dit dans des affaires antérieures que l'article 8 impose aux États l'obligation positive de garantir à leurs citoyens le droit à un respect effectif de leur intégrité physique et morale (voir, par exemple, Nitecki c. Pologne (déc.), no 65653/01, 21 mars 2002, Sentges c. Pays-Bas (déc.), no 27677/02, 8 juillet 2003, Odièvre c. France [GC], no 42326/98, § 42, CEDH 2003-III, Glass c. Royaume-Uni, no 61827/00, §§ 74-83, CEDH 2004-II, et Pentiacova et autres c. Moldova (déc.), no 14462/03, CEDH 2005-I).

 
• EGMR, 13.11.2012 - 47039/11

  HRISTOZOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  It has also held that, with respect to the scope of the State's positive obligations in the provision of health care, an issue may arise under Article 2 where it is shown that the authorities have put an individual's life at risk through the refusal of health care which they have undertaken to make available to the general population (see Cyprus v. Turkey [GC], no. 25781/94, § 219, ECHR 2001-IV; Nitecki, cited above; Pentiacova and Others v. Moldova (dec.), no. 14462/03, ECHR 2005-I; Gheorghe v. Romania (dec.), no. 19215/04, 22 September 2005; and Wiater, cited above, § 35).
• EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 57375/08

  Abtreibungsverbot in Polen: Lebensschützer und der "Fall Agata"

  The Court has previously found States to be under a positive obligation to secure to their citizens the right to effective respect for their physical and psychological integrity (see, among many other authorities, Glass v. the United Kingdom, no. 61827/00, §§ 74-83, ECHR 2004-II; Sentges v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 27677/02, 8 July 2003; Pentiacova and Others v. Moldova (dec.), no. 14462/03, ECHR 2005-...; Carlo Dossi and others v. Italy, (dec.), no. 26053/07, 12 October 2010; Yardımcı v. Turkey, no. 25266/05, 5 January 2010 ; §§ 55-56; Gecekusu v. Turkey (dec.), no. 28870/05, 25 May 2010).
• EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 5335/05

  PONOMARYOVI v. BULGARIA

  Cependant, la Cour ne peut faire abstraction du fait que, à la différence de certaines autres prestations assurées par les services publics (voir Nitecki c. Pologne (déc.), no 65653/01, 21 mars 2002, et Pentiacova et autres c. Moldova (déc.), no 14462/03, CEDH 2005-I, dans le domaine de la santé, Budina c. Russie (déc.), no 45603/05, CEDH 2009-(...), Carson et autres, précité, § 64, Zeïbek, précité, §§ 37-40, et Zubczewski c. Suède (déc.), no 16149/08, 12 janvier 2010, dans le domaine des pensions, et Niedzwiecki c. Allemagne, no 58453/00, §§ 24 et 33, 25 octobre 2005, Okpisz c. Allemagne, no 59140/00, §§ 18 et 34, 25 octobre 2005, Weller c. Hongrie, no 44399/05, § 36, 31 mars 2009, Fawsie, précité, §§ 27-28, et Saidoun, précité, §§ 28-29, dans le domaine des allocations familiales), l'instruction est un droit directement protégé par la Convention.
• EGMR, 20.02.2024 - 53162/21

  DIACONEASA v. ROMANIA

  The Court has previously considered a number of cases concerning funding for care and medical treatment to fall within the sphere of possible positive obligations when the applicants complained in substance not of action but of a lack of action by the respondent State (see, for example, Sentges v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 27677/02, 8 July 2003, and Pentiacova and Others v. Moldova (dec.), no. 14462/03, ECHR 2005-I).
• EGMR, 07.05.2013 - 57665/12

  KOUFAKI ET ADEDY c. GRÈCE

  This margin is even wider when the issues involve an assessment of the priorities as to the allocation of limited State resources (see O'Reilly and Others v. Ireland (dec.), no. 54725/00, 28 February 2002; Pentiacova and Others v. Moldova (dec.), no. 14462/03, 4 January 2005; and Huc v. Romania and Germany (dec.), no. 7269/05, § 64, 1 December 2009).
• EGMR, 17.03.2016 - 23796/10

  VASILEVA v. BULGARIA

  The Court finds that this complaint is to be examined solely under Article 8 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Pentiacova and Others v. Moldova (dec.), no. 14462/03, ECHR 2005-I).
• EGMR, 11.10.2011 - 27240/03

  FANE CIOBANU c. ROUMANIE

  Elle doit examiner si le requérant a eu accès aux soins médicaux courants que les autorités se sont engagées à fournir aux personnes atteintes de la même affection (voir, mutatis mutandis, Nitecki c. Pologne (déc.), no 65653/01, 21 mars 2002, Pentiacova et autres c. Moldova (déc.), no 14462/03, 4 janvier 2005 et Gheoghe c. Roumanie, (déc.) no 19215/04, 22 septembre 2005).
• EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 13341/14

  DA SILVA CARVALHO RICO v. PORTUGAL
• EGMR, 11.04.2006 - 56550/00

  MÓLKA v. POLAND
• EGMR, 16.02.2010 - 7078/02

  V.D. c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 08.10.2013 - 62235/12

  DA CONCEIÇÃO MATEUS AND SANTOS JANUÁRIO v. PORTUGAL
• EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 26828/06

  MAKUC AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA
• EGMR, 20.05.2014 - 4241/12

  McDONALD v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 08.02.2022 - 62250/19

  JIVAN v. ROMANIA
• VG Gießen, 10.05.2021 - 10 K 4330/19

  Pakistan: Widerruf von Abschiebungsverbot nach mehrfachen und längeren …
• EGMR, 25.09.2014 - 570/11

  VIAROPOULOU ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 06.06.2023 - 5049/14

  PITSILADI ET VASILELLIS c. GRÈCE
• VG Gießen, 25.05.2021 - 10 K 171/19

  Iran: Kein anknüpfungsfähiges Verfolgungsmerkmal bei kriminellem Unrecht; …
• EGMR, 02.09.2014 - 19312/07

  TCHAGHIASHVILI v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 06.05.2014 - 62804/13

  DURISOTTO v. ITALY
• EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 16761/09

  G.B. AND R.B. v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 5614/05

  DEMIAN c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 25036/16

  MASTERSKIKH c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 31.05.2016 - 75749/13

  BUKSA v. POLAND
• EGMR, 26.10.2021 - 32934/19

  SALTINYTE v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 10.01.2017 - 58402/09

  DEMIR v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 15.05.2012 - 42290/08

  WIATER v. POLAND