Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SHAKUROV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Extradition) (Conditional) (Uzbekistan) No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention Article 5-1-f - Extradition) Violation ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

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

• EGMR, 02.08.2001 - 54273/00

  BOULTIF v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  The Court has held in cases concerning expulsion of settled migrants that as Article 8 protects the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings and the outside world and can sometimes embrace aspects of an individual's social identity, it must be accepted that the totality of social ties between a settled migrant and the community in which they are living constitutes part of the concept of "private life" within the meaning of Article 8 (see, as a recent authority, Üner v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 46410/99, § 59, ECHR 2006-XII, and Boultif v. Switzerland, no. 54273/00, § 48, ECHR 2001-IX).
• EGMR, 08.03.2006 - 59532/00

  BLECIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  The Court reiterates that it is not open to it to set aside the application of the six-month rule solely because a Government have not made a preliminary objection to that effect (see Blecic v. Croatia [GC], no. 59532/00, § 68, ECHR 2006-III).
• EGMR, 10.08.2006 - 56308/00

  TOSHEV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  It is in the first place for the national authorities, and notably the courts, to interpret domestic law, and in particular, rules of a procedural nature (see Toshev v. Bulgaria, no. 56308/00, § 58, 10 August 2006).

 
• EGMR, 18.10.2006 - 46410/99

  Rechtssache ÜNER gegen die NIEDERLANDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  The Court has held in cases concerning expulsion of settled migrants that as Article 8 protects the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings and the outside world and can sometimes embrace aspects of an individual's social identity, it must be accepted that the totality of social ties between a settled migrant and the community in which they are living constitutes part of the concept of "private life" within the meaning of Article 8 (see, as a recent authority, Üner v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 46410/99, § 59, ECHR 2006-XII, and Boultif v. Switzerland, no. 54273/00, § 48, ECHR 2001-IX).
• EGMR, 20.09.2007 - 664/05

  MERIE v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  Although the number of days taken by the relevant proceedings is obviously an important element, it is not necessarily in itself decisive for the question of whether a decision has been given with the requisite speed (see Merie v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 664/05, 20 September 2007).
• EGMR, 17.07.2008 - 25904/07

  Sri Lanka, Tamilen, Europäischer Menschenrechtsgerichtshof, menschenrechtswidrige …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  It finds that same consideration must apply, a fortiori, in respect of agencies of the United Nations, particularly given their direct access to the authorities of the country of destination as well as their ability to carry out on-site inspections and assessments in a manner which States and non-governmental organisations may not be able to do (see NA. v. the United Kingdom, no. 25904/07, § 121, 17 July 2008).
• EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 40907/98

  Griechenland, Ausweisung, Abschiebung, Abschiebungshaft, Haftbedingungen, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  Quality in this sense implies that where a national law authorises deprivation of liberty, it must be sufficiently accessible and precise, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see, among others, Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 55, ECHR 2001-II).
• EGMR, 05.07.2005 - 2345/02

  SAID v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  As regards the general situation in a particular country, the Court considers that it can attach certain weight to the information contained in recent reports from independent international human rights protection organisations or governmental sources (see, for example, Chahal, cited above, §§ 99-100; Müslim v. Turkey, no. 53566/99, § 67, 26 April 2005; Said v. the Netherlands, no. 2345/02, § 54, ECHR 2005-VI; and Al-Moayad v. Germany (dec.), no. 35865/03, §§ 65-66, 20 February 2007).
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  Moreover, the level of persuasion necessary for reaching a particular conclusion and, in this connection, the distribution of the burden of proof are intrinsically linked to the specificity of the facts, the nature of the allegation made and the Convention right at stake (see, among others, Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 147, ECHR 2005-VII; Ilascu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 48787/99, § 26, ECHR 2004-VII; and Akdivar and Others v. Turkey [GC], 16 September 1996, § 168, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-IV).
• EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 54810/00

  Einsatz von Brechmitteln; Selbstbelastungsfreiheit (Schutzbereich; faires …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 55822/10

  To assess this evidence, the Court adopts the standard of proof "beyond reasonable doubt" but adds that such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact (see Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, § 67, ECHR 2006-IX).
• EGMR, 20.02.2007 - 35865/03

  Mohammed Ali Hassan Al-Moayad
• EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87

  VILVARAJAH ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

  Jens Söring
• EGMR, 20.03.1991 - 15576/89

  CRUZ VARAS ET AUTRES c. SUÈDE

• EGMR, 25.07.2013 - 11082/06

  Chodorkowski: Moskauer Prozesse sind unfair

  The Court would not be concerned, to the same extent, with the speediness of the proceedings before the court of appeal, if the detention order under review was imposed by a court and on condition that the procedure followed by that court had a judicial character and afforded to the detainee the appropriate procedural guarantees" (see Shakurov v. Russia, no. 55822/10, § 179, 5 June 2012).
• EGMR, 12.12.2013 - 77658/11

  LATIPOV c. RUSSIE

  Toutefois, la Cour réitère que le principe selon lequel la simple référence à un problème général pouvant exister quant au respect des droits de l'homme dans un pays ne suffit pas pour interdire toute extradition vers ce pays (Kamyshev c. Ukraine, no 3990/06, § 44, 20 May 2010, et Shakurov c. Russie, no 55822/10, § 135, 5 juin 2012).
• EGMR, 18.04.2013 - 67474/11

  AZIMOV v. RUSSIA

  The Court will examine the merits of the applicant's complaint under Article 3 in the light of the applicable general principles, as reiterated in Saadi v. Italy [GC], (no. 37201/06, §§ 124-136, ECHR 2008), and Shakurov v. Russia (no. 55822/10, §§ 118-128, 5 June 2012).

 
• EGMR, 22.06.2023 - 47952/21

  AZZENA c. FRANCE

  Dans des affaires d'extradition vers des États non membres de l'Union européenne, la Cour a considéré que ce n'est que dans des circonstances exceptionnelles que la vie privée ou familiale de la personne extradée peut l'emporter sur le but légitime poursuivi par son extradition (King c. Royaume-Uni (déc.), no 9742/07, § 29, 26 janvier 2010, et Shakurov c. Russie, no 55822/10, § 196, 5 juin 2012, Trabelsi c. Belgique, no 140/10, § 169, CEDH 2014 (extraits), et Vlas et autres c. Roumanie (déc.), no 30541/12, § 47, 6 janvier 2015).
• EGMR, 14.02.2017 - 55214/15

  MARTINS O'NEILL PEDROSA v. PORTUGAL

  What is taken into account is the diligence shown by the authorities, the delay attributable to the applicant and any factors causing delay for which the State cannot be held responsible (see Shakurov, v. Russia, no. 55822/10, § 180, 5 June 2012).
• EGMR, 26.02.2015 - 66373/13

  KHALIKOV v. RUSSIA

  However, it does not need to determine whether the same is true in the instant case because even where the purpose of detention is legitimate, its length should not exceed that reasonably required for the purpose pursued (see Azimov, cited above, § 166, and Shakurov v. Russia, no. 55822/10, § 162, 5 June 2012).
• EGMR, 26.06.2014 - 34742/13

  EGAMBERDIYEV v. RUSSIA

  However, it does not need to determine whether the same is true in the instant case because even where the purpose of detention is legitimate, its length should not exceed that reasonably required for the purpose pursued (see Azimov, cited above, § 166, and Shakurov v. Russia, no. 55822/10, § 162, 5 June 2012).