Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 12646/15 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2016,31333) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
MAYLENSKIY v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 34 - Individual applications (Article 34 - Hinder the exercise of the right of petition);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) ...
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 27.03.2008 - 44009/05
SHTUKATUROV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 12646/15
The interim measure was therefore also meant to ensure that the applicant could effectively pursue his case before the Court (see Amirov, cited above, § 70, and Shtukaturov v. Russia, no. 44009/05, § 141, ECHR 2008). - EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 45520/04
LARIONOVS AND TESS v. LATVIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 12646/15
45520/04 and 19363/05, § 172, 25 November 2014). - EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 33071/96
MALHOUS c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 12646/15
The Court notes that it normally permits the next of kin to pursue an application, provided he or she has a legitimate interest, where the original applicant died after lodging the application with the Court (see Murray v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 10511/10, § 79, 26 April 2016; Malhous v. the Czech Republic (dec.) [GC], no. 33071/96, ECHR 2000-XII; and Larionovs and Tess v. Latvia (dec.), nos. - EGMR, 13.11.2012 - 24677/10
KORYAK v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 12646/15
Having regard to the subject matter of the application and all the information in its possession, the Court considers that the applicant's mother has a legitimate interest in pursuing the application and that she thus has the requisite locus standi under Article 34 of the Convention (see Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, §§ 58-68, 13 November 2012).
- EGMR, 04.12.2018 - 5374/07
YANDAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
The Court normally permits the next of kin to pursue an application, provided they have a legitimate interest, where the original applicant died after lodging the application with the Court (see Murray v. the Netherlands [GC], no.10511/10, § 79, 26 April 2016, and Maylenskiy v. Russia, no. 12646/15, § 27, 4 October 2016; for cases concerning abductions in Chechnya see Sultygov and Others v. Russia, nos. - EGMR, 13.10.2022 - 45095/19
MIKHALEV AND SAVINOV v. RUSSIA
32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), as regards placement of an applicant in a metal cage during court hearings, and Maylenskiy v. Russia, no. 12646/15, §§ 28-40, 4 October 2016, and Klimov v. Russia, no. 54436/14, §§ 41-50, 4 October 2016, as regards the State's failure to comply with the interim measure indicated by the Court under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, in breach of its obligation under Article 34 of the Convention.