Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 37725/15 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2018,20080) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
CEAICOVSCHI v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
CEAICOVSCHI v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 37725/15
- EGMR, 06.06.2019 - 37725/15
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87
TOMASI c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 37725/15
Justifications which have been deemed "relevant" and "sufficient" reasons in the Court's case-law have included such grounds as the danger of absconding, the risk of pressure being brought to bear on witnesses or of evidence being tampered with, the risk of collusion, the risk of reoffending, the risk of causing public disorder and the need to protect the detainee (see, for instance, Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9; Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 14, Series A no. 7; Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207; Toth v. Austria, 12 December 1991, § 70, Series A no. 224; Tomasi v. France, 27 August 1992, § 95, Series A no. 241-A; and I.A. v. France, 23 September 1998, § 108, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VII). - EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64
Wemhoff ./. Deutschland
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 37725/15
Justifications which have been deemed "relevant" and "sufficient" reasons in the Court's case-law have included such grounds as the danger of absconding, the risk of pressure being brought to bear on witnesses or of evidence being tampered with, the risk of collusion, the risk of reoffending, the risk of causing public disorder and the need to protect the detainee (see, for instance, Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9; Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 14, Series A no. 7; Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207; Toth v. Austria, 12 December 1991, § 70, Series A no. 224; Tomasi v. France, 27 August 1992, § 95, Series A no. 241-A; and I.A. v. France, 23 September 1998, § 108, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VII). - EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86
LETELLIER c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 37725/15
Justifications which have been deemed "relevant" and "sufficient" reasons in the Court's case-law have included such grounds as the danger of absconding, the risk of pressure being brought to bear on witnesses or of evidence being tampered with, the risk of collusion, the risk of reoffending, the risk of causing public disorder and the need to protect the detainee (see, for instance, Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9; Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 14, Series A no. 7; Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207; Toth v. Austria, 12 December 1991, § 70, Series A no. 224; Tomasi v. France, 27 August 1992, § 95, Series A no. 241-A; and I.A. v. France, 23 September 1998, § 108, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VII). - EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 48183/99
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 37725/15
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 (extracts)). - EGMR, 10.11.1969 - 1602/62
Stögmüller ./. Österreich
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 37725/15
Justifications which have been deemed "relevant" and "sufficient" reasons in the Court's case-law have included such grounds as the danger of absconding, the risk of pressure being brought to bear on witnesses or of evidence being tampered with, the risk of collusion, the risk of reoffending, the risk of causing public disorder and the need to protect the detainee (see, for instance, Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9; Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 14, Series A no. 7; Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207; Toth v. Austria, 12 December 1991, § 70, Series A no. 224; Tomasi v. France, 27 August 1992, § 95, Series A no. 241-A; and I.A. v. France, 23 September 1998, § 108, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VII).