Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2001,35644
EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95 (https://dejure.org/2001,35644)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04.05.2001 - 28883/95 (https://dejure.org/2001,35644)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04. Mai 2001 - 28883/95 (https://dejure.org/2001,35644)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2001,35644) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    McKERR c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 2 Abs. 2, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 36, Art. 36 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
    Violation de l'art. 2 Non-violation de l'art. 14 Non-violation de l'art. 13 Préjudice moral - réparation pécuniaire Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure de la Convention ...

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    McKERR v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 2 Abs. 2, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 36, Art. 36 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
    Violation of Art. 2 No violation of Art. 14 No violation of Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings ...

  • juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (284)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

  • EGMR, 11.01.2000 - 24520/94

    CARAHER contre le ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
    These civil proceedings are wholly independent of any criminal investigation and their efficacy has not been shown to rely on the proper conduct of criminal investigations or prosecutions (see, for example, Caraher v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 24520/94, ECHR 2000-I).
  • EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21594/93

    Verursachung des Todes eines türkischen Staatsangehörigen durch türkische

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
    For an investigation into alleged unlawful killing by State agents to be effective, it may generally be regarded as necessary for the persons responsible for and carrying out the investigation to be independent from those implicated in the events (see, for example, Güleç v. Turkey, judgment of 27 July 1998, Reports 1998-IV, p. 1733, §§ 81-82, and OÄ?ur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, §§ 91-92, ECHR 1999-III).
  • EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23763/94

    TANRIKULU c. TURQUIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
    The authorities must take whatever reasonable steps they can to secure the evidence concerning the incident, including, inter alia, eyewitness testimony, forensic evidence and, where appropriate, an autopsy which provides a complete and accurate record of injury and an objective analysis of clinical findings, including the cause of death (see, concerning autopsies, for example, Salman, cited above, § 106; concerning witnesses, for example, Tanrıkulu v. Turkey [GC], no. 23763/94, § 109, ECHR 1999-IV; and concerning forensic evidence, for example, Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, § 89, 14 December 2000, unreported).
  • EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

    MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
    A requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition is implicit in this context (see Yasa v. Turkey, judgment of 2 September 1998, Reports 1998-VI, pp. 2439-40, §§ 102-04; Çakıcı, cited above, §§ 80, 87 and 106; Tanrıkulu, cited above, § 109; and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, §§ 106-07, ECHR 2000-III).
  • EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

    TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
    Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; and also Çakıcı v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, § 85, ECHR 1999-IV; Ertak v. Turkey, no. 20764/92, § 32, ECHR 2000-V; and Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 82, ECHR 2000-VI).
  • EGMR, 14.12.2000 - 22676/93

    GÜL v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
    The authorities must take whatever reasonable steps they can to secure the evidence concerning the incident, including, inter alia, eyewitness testimony, forensic evidence and, where appropriate, an autopsy which provides a complete and accurate record of injury and an objective analysis of clinical findings, including the cause of death (see, concerning autopsies, for example, Salman, cited above, § 106; concerning witnesses, for example, Tanrıkulu v. Turkey [GC], no. 23763/94, § 109, ECHR 1999-IV; and concerning forensic evidence, for example, Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, § 89, 14 December 2000, unreported).
  • EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

    McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
    The object and purpose of the Convention as an instrument for the protection of individual human beings also requires that Article 2 be interpreted and applied so as to make its safeguards practical and effective (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324, pp. 45-46, §§ 146-47).
  • EGMR, 07.07.2011 - 55721/07

    Britische Soldaten sollen Kriegsverbrechen begangen haben

    Le rôle joué par la hiérarchie militaire dans la notification à la section spéciale d'investigation d'un incident appelant une enquête et, ultérieurement, dans le renvoi devant l'Autorité de poursuite de l'armée des affaires examinées par ladite section, n'autoriserait pas à conclure que ces enquêtes ne présentaient pas l'indépendance requise par les articles 2 ou 3 (Cooper c. Royaume-Uni [GC], no 48843/99, §§ 108-115, CEDH 2003-XII ; McKerr c. Royaume-Uni, no 28883/95, CEDH 2001-III, et Paul et Audrey Edwards c. Royaume-Uni, no 46477/99, CEDH 2002-II).
  • EGMR, 28.09.2015 - 23380/09

    BOUYID v. BELGIUM

    The Court also pointed out in the El-Masri judgment (cited above, § 155) that although it recognised that it must be cautious in taking on the role of a first-instance tribunal of fact where this was not made unavoidable by the circumstances of a particular case (see McKerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 28883/95, 4 April 2000), it had to apply a "particularly thorough scrutiny" where allegations were made under Article 3 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 32, Series A no. 336; and Georgiy Bykov v. Russia, no. 24271/03, § 51, 14 October 2010), even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations had already taken place (see Cobzaru v. Romania, no. 48254/99, § 65, 26 July 2007).

    As the Court has emphasised on previous occasions, although there may be obstacles or difficulties which prevent progress in an investigation in a particular situation, a prompt response by the authorities in investigating allegations of ill-treatment may generally be regarded as essential in maintaining public confidence in their adherence to the rule of law and in preventing any appearance of collusion in or tolerance of unlawful acts (see, among other authorities, McKerr v. the United Kingdom, no. 28883/95, § 114, ECHR 2001-III; and Mocanu and Others, cited above, § 323).

  • EGMR, 20.12.2004 - 50385/99

    MAKARATZIS c. GRECE

    The remedy required by Article 13 must be "effective" in practice as well as in law, in particular in the sense that its exercise must not be unjustifiably hindered by the acts or omissions of the authorities of the respondent State (see Kaya v. Turkey, judgment of 19 February 1998, Reports 1998-I, pp. 329-30, § 106; Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 96, ECHR 2002-II; Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, § 100, 14 December 2000; Ä°lhan, cited above; and McKerr v. the United Kingdom, no. 28883/95, § 107, ECHR 2001-III).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht