Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KORBAN v. UKRAINE

  Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  KORBAN v. UKRAINE

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 18 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (14)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 36760/06

  STANEV c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 26744/16

  In this connection, the effective enjoyment of the right to compensation guaranteed by Article 5 § 5 must be ensured with a sufficient degree of certainty (see Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, § 182, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 21.04.2011 - 42310/04

  NECHIPORUK AND YONKALO v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 26744/16

  The accessibility of a remedy implies, inter alia, that the circumstances voluntarily created by the authorities must be such as to afford applicants a realistic possibility of using the remedy (see Nechiporuk and Yonkalo v. Ukraine, no. 42310/04, § 239, 21 April 2011).
• EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 61603/00

  Konventionskonforme Auslegung des deutschen (Zivil-)Rechts …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 26744/16

  The Court has held in its case-law that the right to liberty is too important in a democratic society for a person to lose the benefit of the protection of the Convention simply because he gave himself up to be taken into detention (see Storck v. Germany, no. 61603/00, § 75, ECHR 2005-V).

 
• EGMR, 28.11.2000 - 29462/95

  REHBOCK c. SLOVENIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 26744/16

  The question whether a person's right under Article 5 § 4 has been respected has to be determined in the light of the circumstances of each case (see Rehbock v. Slovenia, no. 29462/95, § 84, ECHR 2000-XII).
• EGMR - 43441/08 (anhängig)

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 26744/16

  The Court has held that holding a person in a metal cage during a trial - having regard to its objectively degrading nature, which is incompatible with the standards of civilised behaviour that are the hallmark of a democratic society - constitutes in itself an affront to human dignity in breach of Article 3 (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, § 138, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 08.03.2012 - 34361/06

  SLYUSAR v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 26744/16

  According to the Court's case-law, Article 5 § 4 of the Convention is no longer applicable to any attempts to get a judicial review of the lawfulness of one's deprivation of liberty after release (see, mutatis mutandis, Slyusar v. Ukraine, no. 34361/06, § 13, 8 March 2012, and the reference therein to Reinprecht v. Austria, no. 67175/01, § 51, ECHR 2005-XII).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 26744/16

  It prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (see, for example, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).

• EGMR, 24.02.2022 - 64471/13

  KOSINSKYY AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Svershov v. Ukraine (no. 35231/02, §§ 70-72, 27 November 2008), Kharchenko (cited above, §§ 84-87); Tymoshenko v. Ukraine (no. 49872/11, §§ 286-87, 30 April 2013), Kotiy v. Ukraine (no. 28718/09, § 55, 5 March 2015), Korban v. Ukraine (no. 26744/16, §§ 132-34, 4 July 2019) and Nechay v. Ukraine (no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021).

  3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - handcuffing and metal cage during the hearings (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, § 138, 17 July 2014; Korban v. Ukraine, no. 26744/16, §§ 132-34, 4 July 2019),.

• EGMR, 10.11.2022 - 60928/12

  LABUDYAK AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  32541/08 and 43441/08, § 138, ECHR 2014 (extracts), Korban v. Ukraine, no. 26744/16, § 127, 4 July 2019 and Sukachov v. Ukraine, no. 14057/17, 30 January 2020.

  Furthermore, the Court has emphasised that conducting judicial hearings at night can be justified only in cases of particular urgency (see Korban v. Ukraine, no. 26744/16, § 127, 4 July 2019).

• EGMR, 11.07.2022 - 28749/18

  Urteil nicht befolgt: Türkei muss Geldstrafe im Fall Kavala zahlen

  Une telle situation équivaudrait à permettre un contournement du droit et risquerait de conduire à des résultats incompatibles avec l'objet et le but de la Convention (voir, parmi plusieurs autres, Korban c. Ukraine, no 26744/16, § 150, 4 juillet 2019, Atilla Tas c. Turquie, no 72/17, § 77, 19 janvier 2021).

 
• EGMR, 18.01.2024 - 13921/17

  ROLIK AND SHANDRA v. UKRAINE

  In the leading case of Korban v. Ukraine (no. 26744/16, §§ 158-81, 4 July 2019), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
• EGMR, 14.12.2023 - 70283/17

  DOTSENKO AND FILIPENKO v. UKRAINE

  The Court also points out that round-the-clock house arrest is considered to amount to deprivation of liberty within the meaning of Article 5 (see Korban v. Ukraine, no. 26744/16, §§ 138-40, 4 July 2019).
• EGMR, 09.06.2022 - 47915/09

  DADASHOV AND HAJIBEYLI v. AZERBAIJAN

  The Court refers to its well-established case-law principles regarding the assessment of whether the treatment complained of attained the minimum level of severity to fall within the scope of Article 3 of the Convention (see Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, §§ 81-90, ECHR 2015, and Korban v. Ukraine, no. 26744/16, § 104, 4 July 2019).
• EGMR, 05.10.2023 - 52212/13

  KOZLOVSKA v. UKRAINE

  The relevant general principles are summarized in Korban v. Ukraine, no. 26744/16, § 145, 4 July 2019.
• EGMR, 05.10.2023 - 49701/12

  MOYSEYETS AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  In the leading case of Korban v. Ukraine (no. 26744/16, §§ 158-81, 4 July 2019), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
• EGMR, 10.02.2022 - 36508/19

  KOVAL v. UKRAINE

  Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Kharchenko v. Ukraine, no. 40107/02, 10 February 2011, 1gnatov v. Ukraine, no. 40583/15, 15 December 2016, Korban v. Ukraine, no. 26744/16, 4 July 2019, and Nechay v. Ukraine, no. 15360/10, 1 July 2021.
• EGMR, 10.02.2022 - 24178/14

  BARTKOVA AND VORONIN v. UKRAINE

  In the leading case of Korban v. Ukraine, no. 26744/16, §§ 158-81, 4 July 2019, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
• EGMR - 59342/19 (anhängig)

  NIKOLAYENKO v. UKRAINE
• EGMR - 50474/20 (anhängig)

  KRYUK v. UKRAINE and 1 other application
• EGMR, 17.03.2022 - 77612/11

  ISGANDAROV v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 13.01.2022 - 23312/15

  ISTOMINA v. UKRAINE