Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2015,12285
EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11 (https://dejure.org/2015,12285)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04.06.2015 - 5425/11 (https://dejure.org/2015,12285)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04. Juni 2015 - 5425/11 (https://dejure.org/2015,12285)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,12285) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    RUSLAN YAKOVENKO v. UKRAINE

    Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 2 MRK
    Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention Article 5-1-a - After conviction) Violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 - Right of appeal in criminal matters (Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 - Review of conviction ...

Sonstiges

 
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 ... (31)Neu Zitiert selbst (15)

  • EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

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

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    Bearing the above principle in mind, the Court has also held in its case-law that hindrance in fact can contravene the Convention just like a legal impediment (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 26, Series A no. 18, and, for a more recent reference, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 113, ECHR 2014).
  • EGMR, 15.02.2000 - 38695/97

    GARCÍA MANIBARDO c. ESPAGNE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    This is particularly so of the right of access to court in view of the prominent place held in a democratic society by the right to a fair trial (see Airey v. Ireland, 9 October 1979, § 24, Series A no. 32, and García Manibardo v. Spain, no. 38695/97, § 43, ECHR 2000-II).
  • EGMR, 09.10.1979 - 6289/73

    AIREY v. IRELAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    This is particularly so of the right of access to court in view of the prominent place held in a democratic society by the right to a fair trial (see Airey v. Ireland, 9 October 1979, § 24, Series A no. 32, and García Manibardo v. Spain, no. 38695/97, § 43, ECHR 2000-II).
     
  • EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

    GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    Bearing the above principle in mind, the Court has also held in its case-law that hindrance in fact can contravene the Convention just like a legal impediment (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 26, Series A no. 18, and, for a more recent reference, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 113, ECHR 2014).
  • EGMR, 15.04.2012 - 29520/09

    [ENG]

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    As was pointed out by Judge Wojtyczek in point 11 of his separate opinion in the case of Janowiec and Others v. Russia ([GC], nos. 55508/07 and 29520/09, ECHR 2013), "[it] should be noted that the instant case was referred to the Grand Chamber at the request of the applicants.
  • EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 41242/08

    PLESÓ v. HUNGARY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    The Court has not previously formulated a global definition of what types of conduct on the part of the authorities might constitute "arbitrariness" for the purposes of Article 5 § 1. However, key principles that have been developed on a case-by-case basis demonstrate that the notion of arbitrariness in the context of Article 5 varies to a certain extent depending on the type of detention involved (see Saadi v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 13229/03, § 68, ECHR 2008, and Plesó v. Hungary, no. 41242/08, § 57, 2 October 2012).
  • EGMR, 28.06.2007 - 65734/01

    SHUKHARDIN v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    It is for the Contracting States to organise their legal system in such a way that their law-enforcement authorities can meet the obligation to avoid unjustified deprivation of liberty (see, for example, Shukhardin v. Russia, no. 65734/01, § 93, 28 June 2007; and Mokallal v. Ukraine, no. 19246/10, § 44, 10 November 2011).
  • EGMR, 10.11.2011 - 19246/10

    MOKALLAL v. UKRAINE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    It is for the Contracting States to organise their legal system in such a way that their law-enforcement authorities can meet the obligation to avoid unjustified deprivation of liberty (see, for example, Shukhardin v. Russia, no. 65734/01, § 93, 28 June 2007; and Mokallal v. Ukraine, no. 19246/10, § 44, 10 November 2011).
  • EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 29731/96

    Dieter Krombach

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    The Court notes that the Contracting States in principle enjoy a wide margin of appreciation in determining how the right secured by Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention is to be exercised (see Krombach v. France, no. 29731/96, § 96, ECHR 2001-II).
  • EGMR, 21.10.2013 - 42750/09

    Spanien muss Eta-Attentäterin freilassen

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.06.2015 - 5425/11
    The Court has also held in its case-law that, having regard to the French text (condamnation), the word "conviction", for the purposes of Article 5 § 1 (a), has to be understood as signifying both a finding of guilt after it has been established in accordance with the law that there has been an offence, and the imposition of a penalty or other measure involving deprivation of liberty (see Guzzardi v. Italy, 6 November 1980, § 100, Series A no. 39; Van Droogenbroeck v. Belgium, 24 June 1982, § 35, Series A no. 50; and, for a more recent case-law, Del Río Prada v. Spain [GC], no. 42750/09, § 123, ECHR 2013).
  • EGMR, 22.03.1995 - 18580/91

    QUINN c. FRANCE

  • EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7367/76

    GUZZARDI v. ITALY

  • EGMR, 24.06.1982 - 7906/77

    VAN DROOGENBROECK v. BELGIUM

  • EGMR, 28.03.1990 - 11968/86

    B. ./. Österreich

  • EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64

    Wemhoff ./. Deutschland

  • EGMR, 10.11.2022 - 60928/12

    LABUDYAK AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

    delayed release (Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, §§ 68-70, ECHR 2015).

    delayed release (Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, §§ 68-70, ECHR 2015).

    delayed release (Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, §§ 68-70, ECHR 2015).

    delayed release (Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, §§ 68-70, ECHR 2015).

  • EGMR, 02.11.2021 - 38958/16

    W.A. v. SWITZERLAND

    The Court has held in its case-law that the word "conviction" for the purposes of Article 5 § 1 (a), having regard to the French text ("condamnation"), has to be understood as signifying both a finding of guilt after it has been established in accordance with the law that there has been an offence, and the imposition of a penalty or other measure involving the deprivation of liberty (see Del Río Prada v. Spain [GC], no. 42750/09, § 123, ECHR 2013, and Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, § 49, ECHR 2015).
  • EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 4565/14

    KHIMCHAK AND BILYK v. UKRAINE

    In the leading case of Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, (no. 5425/11, §§ 68-70, 4 June 2015) the Court found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see the appended table).

    delayed release (Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, §§ 68-70, ECHR 2015).

    delayed release (Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, §§ 68-70, ECHR 2015).

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