Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  V.K. v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  KOTENEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. e, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

  CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.04.2017 - 9139/08

  However, having regarding to the above finding of a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention, the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine whether, in this case, the other complaints under Article 5 of the Convention are admissible and whether there have also been violations of that provision (see, for the approach, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73

  WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.04.2017 - 9139/08

  In Winterwerp v. the Netherlands (24 October 1979, § 39, Series A no. 33), the Court set out three minimum conditions which have to be satisfied for the "detention of a person of unsound mind" to be lawful within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 (e): except in emergency situations the individual concerned must be reliably shown to be of unsound mind, that is to say, a true mental disorder must be established before a competent authority on the basis of objective medical evidence; the mental disorder must be of a kind or degree warranting compulsory confinement; and the validity of continued confinement depends upon the persistence of such a disorder.

• EGMR, 04.12.2018 - 10211/12

  Sicherungsverwahrung für deutschen Sexualmörder gebilligt

  Die Freiheitsentziehung stellt eine derart schwerwiegende Maßnahme dar, dass sie nur gerechtfertigt ist, wenn andere, weniger einschneidende Maßnahmen in Betracht gezogen und zum Schutz des Einzelnen oder der Allgemeinheit für nicht ausreichend befunden wurden (…siehe C.B../. Rumänien, a.a.O., Rdnr. 38;… Karamanof./. Griechenland, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 46372/09, Rdnr. 42, 26. Juli 2011; Stanev, a.a.O., Rdnr. 143, und V.K../. Russland, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 9139/08, Rdnr. 30, 4. April 2017, mit weiteren Nachweisen).
• EGMR, 08.10.2020 - 70579/12

  SHUMANSKYY v. UKRAINE

  Having regard to the facts of the case, the submissions of the parties, and its finding under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see paragraph 62 above), the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine whether, in this case, the applicant's complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention is admissible and whether there has also been a violation of that provision (see, for the approach, V.K. v. Russia, no. 9139/08, § 43, 4 April 2017, and the reference therein to Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014).
• EGMR, 24.05.2022 - 10586/07

  A.Y. v. RUSSIA

  The notion of "lawfulness" requires a fair and proper procedure offering the person concerned sufficient protection against arbitrary deprivation of liberty (see V.K. v. Russia, no. 9139/08, § 33, 4 April 2017, and X v. Finland, no. 34806/04, § 148, ECHR 2012 (extracts), with further references).
• EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 10042/11

  KORNIYCHUK v. UKRAINE

  However, having regard to the above findings of a violation of Article 5 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention, the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine whether, in this case, the other complaints under Article 5 of the Convention are admissible and whether there have also been violations of that provision (see, for the approach, V.K. v. Russia, no. 9139/08, § 43, 4 April 2017, and the reference therein to Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014).