Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
MARGARETIC v. CROATIA
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Review of lawfulness of detention) No violation of Article 6 - ...
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Margaretic v. Croatia
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
MARGARETIC v. CROATIA
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
[ENG]
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
- EGMR, 30.01.2019 - 16115/13
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (9)
- EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 38822/97
Recht auf Freiheit und Sicherheit (zur Wahrnehmung richterlicher Aufgaben …
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
Furthermore, Article 5 § 4 enshrines, as does Article 6 § 1, the right of access to a court, which can only be subject to reasonable limitations that do not impair its very essence (see Shishkov v. Bulgaria, no. 38822/97, §§ 82-90, ECHR 2003-I, and Bochev v. Bulgaria, no. 73481/01, § 70, 13 November 2008). - EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01
STEEL ET MORRIS c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
Article 6 § 1 leaves to the State a free choice of the means to be used in guaranteeing litigants these rights (see Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, §§ 59-60, ECHR 2005-II). - EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 46133/99
SMIRNOVA c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
The arguments for and against release must not be "general and abstract" (see Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 63, ECHR 2003-IX).
- EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 12050/04
Mangouras ./. Spanien
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
They must duly justify the amount in the decision fixing bail, and they must take into account the accused's means and his capacity to pay the sum required (see Mangouras v. Spain [GC], no. 12050/04, §§ 78-80, ECHR 2010). - EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 33509/04
BURDOV v. RUSSIA (No. 2)
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
Redress so afforded must be appropriate and sufficient, failing which a party can continue to claim to be a victim of the violation (see, among others, Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, §§ 54-56, ECHR 2009, with further references). - EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
Continued detention can be justified only if there are specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty (see, among other authorities, W. v. Switzerland, 26 January 1993, Series A no. 254-A, and Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI). - EGMR, 26.01.1993 - 14379/88
W. c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
Continued detention can be justified only if there are specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty (see, among other authorities, W. v. Switzerland, 26 January 1993, Series A no. 254-A, and Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI). - EGMR, 28.03.1990 - 11968/86
B. ./. Österreich
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see, amongst many others, Contrada v. Italy, 24 August 1998, § 54, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-V; I.A. v. France, 23 September 1998, § 102, Reports 1998-VII; Toth v. Austria, 12 December 1991, § 67, Series A no. 224; and B. v. Austria, 28 March 1990, § 42, Series A no. 175). - EGMR, 22.12.2009 - 27996/06
SEJDIC ET FINCI c. BOSNIE-HERZÉGOVINE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13
The Court will examine this issue of its own motion (see, mutatis mutandis, Sejdic and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 27996/06 and 34836/06, § 27, ECHR 2009).
- EGMR, 22.10.2015 - 75863/11
S.M. v. RUSSIA
Being the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case (see Margaretic v. Croatia, no. 16115/13, § 75, 5 June 2014), the Court considers accordingly that the applicant's grievances fall to be examined solely under Article 3 of the Convention (see Y. v. Slovenia, no. 41107/10, § 74, 28 May 2015), which reads:.