Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KURT v. AUSTRIA

  No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect) (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KURT v. AUSTRIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  [DEU] No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• lto.de (Kurzinformation)

  Amtshaftungsklage gegen Österreich: Behörden reagierten ausreichend auf häusliche Gewalt

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  KURT v. AUSTRIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Videoaufzeichnung der mündlichen Verhandlung)

  Kurt v. Austria

  [17.06.2020]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15
• EGMR, 15.06.2021 - 62903/15

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02

  Opuz ./. Türkei

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15

  The relevant international law has partly been summarised in Opuz v. Turkey (no. 33401/02, § 72-90, ECHR 2009).

  It had to be "established that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual" (see Osman v. the United Kingdom, 28 October 1998, § 116, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII; Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, §§ 128-30, ECHR 2009; Talpis v. Italy, no. 41237/14, § 101, 2 March 2017).

• EGMR, 02.03.2017 - 41237/14

  Italien muss Opfer von häuslicher Gewalt entschädigen

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15

  It had to be "established that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual" (see Osman v. the United Kingdom, 28 October 1998, § 116, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII; Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, §§ 128-30, ECHR 2009; Talpis v. Italy, no. 41237/14, § 101, 2 March 2017).

  The recent Talpis judgment (Talpis v. Italy, no. 41237/14, 2 March 2017) gave hope that the Court was ready to deviate from an incident-based understanding of domestic violence and reconsider the application of the Osman test to the particular situation of domestic violence, or at least to interpret the concept of immediate risk flexibly.

• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

  Jens Söring

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15

  The Court reiterates that Article 2 must be regarded as one of the most fundamental provisions of the Convention and as enshrining one of the core values of the democratic societies making up the Council of Europe (see Giuliani and Gaggio v. Italy [GC], no. 24458/02, § 174; Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 88, Series A no. 161).

 
• EGMR, 20.03.2008 - 15339/02

  BUDAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15

  15339/02 and 4 others, § 129, ECHR 2008 (extracts); Kolyadenko and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96

  CALVELLI ET CIGLIO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15

  It requires the State not only to refrain from the "intentional" taking of life, but also to take appropriate steps to safeguard the lives of those within its jurisdiction (see Fernandes de Oliveira v. Portugal, cited above, § 104; Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 48, ECHR 2002-I).
• EGMR, 28.02.2012 - 17423/05

  KOLYADENKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15

  17423/05 and 5 others, § 157, 28 February 2012; Fernandes de Oliveira, cited above, §§ 103 and 105-107; and Talpis, cited above, § 100).
• EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 7510/04

  KONTROVA c. SLOVAQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15

  Second, in appropriate circumstances there is a positive obligation on the authorities to take preventive operational measures to protect an individual whose life is at risk from the criminal acts of another individual (see Osman, cited above, § 115, cited in Kontrová v. Slovakia, no. 7510/04, § 49, 31 May 2007; Fernandes de Oliveira, cited above, § 108).