Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BANDUR v. HUNGARY
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Article 5-1-c - Reasonable suspicion);Violation of Article 5 - ...
Sonstiges
Wird zitiert von ... (14) Neu Zitiert selbst (12)
- EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 42525/07
ANANYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
The Court reiterates, in particular, that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are "degrading" within the meaning of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many other authorities, Karalevicius v. Lithuania, no. 53254/99, §§ 39-40, 7 April 2005; Ananyev and Others v. Russia nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, § 143, 10 January 2012; and Varga and Others v. Hungary, no. 14097/12, §§ 73- 77, 10 March 2015).The Court has found a violation of Article 3 because the lack or short duration of outdoor exercise was a factor that further exacerbated the situation of the applicant, who was confined to his cell for all or the rest of his time (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149-151, 10 January 2012, and the case-law cited therein).
In Ananyev and Others v. Russia (nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, § 145, 10 January 2012) the Court found that "whereas the provision of four square metres remains the desirable standard of multi-occupancy accommodation, the Court has found that where the applicants have at their disposal less than three square metres of floor surface, the overcrowding must be considered to be so severe as to justify of itself a finding of a violation of Article 3".
- EGMR, 22.05.2012 - 5826/03
IDALOV c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
When assessing conditions of detention, account has to be taken of the cumulative effects of those conditions, as well as of the specific allegations made by the applicant (see Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 46, ECHR 2001-II, and Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, § 94, 22 May 2012).Justification for any period of detention, no matter how short, must be convincingly demonstrated by the authorities (see Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, § 140, 22 May 2012).
- EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 14097/12
VARGA AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
The Court has already examined the same objection based on the exhaustion of domestic remedies, raised by the Government in the case of Varga and Others v. Hungary (nos. 14097/12, 45135/12, 73712/12, 34001/13, 44055/13, and 64586/13, 10 March 2015).The Court reiterates, in particular, that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are "degrading" within the meaning of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many other authorities, Karalevicius v. Lithuania, no. 53254/99, §§ 39-40, 7 April 2005; Ananyev and Others v. Russia nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, § 143, 10 January 2012; and Varga and Others v. Hungary, no. 14097/12, §§ 73- 77, 10 March 2015).
- EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90
YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
The Court reiterates that under the second limb of Article 5 § 3, a person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify his continuing detention (see Yagci and Sargin v. Turkey, 8 June 1995, § 52, Series A no. 319-A). - EGMR, 24.11.1993 - 13972/88
IMBRIOSCIA c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
According to the Court's case-law, it follows from the wording of Article 6 - and particularly from the autonomous meaning to be given to the notion of "criminal charge" - that this provision has some application to pre-trial proceedings (see Imbrioscia v. Switzerland, 24 November 1993, § 36, Series A no. 275). - EGMR, 06.02.2014 - 48613/06
ZIMIN v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
Continued detention can only be justified in a given case if there are actual indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty laid down in Article 5 of the Convention (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI, and Zimin v. Russia, no. 48613/06, § 30, 6 February 2014). - EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 23541/94
Recht auf Akteneinsicht bei der Haftprüfung (wesentliche Verfahrensakten; …
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
Equality of arms is not ensured if counsel is denied access to the investigation file in so far as that access is essential in order effectively to challenge the lawfulness of his client's detention (see Garcia Alva v. Germany, no. 23541/94, § 39, 13 February 2001). - EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95
LABITA c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
The existence and persistence of a reasonable suspicion that the person arrested has committed an offence is a conditio sine qua non for the lawfulness of the continued detention (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 153, ECHR 2000-IV). - EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 24479/94
Recht auf Akteneinsicht bei der Haftprüfung (wesentliche Verfahrensakten; …
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
While national law may satisfy this requirement in various ways, whatever method is chosen should ensure that the other party will be aware that observations have been filed and will have a real opportunity to comment on them (see Lietzow v. Germany, no. 24479/94, § 44, ECHR 2001-I). - EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 64812/01
ALVER v. ESTONIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
The length of time a person is detained in the particular conditions also has to be considered (see, among other authorities, Alver v. Estonia, no. 64812/01, 8 November 2005). - EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95
WLOCH v. POLAND
- EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 40907/98
Griechenland, Ausweisung, Abschiebung, Abschiebungshaft, Haftbedingungen, …
- EGMR, 25.04.2024 - 57470/22
LAKATOS AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in, among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. - EGMR - 5818/15 (anhängig)
KÓTÉ v. HUNGARY
Was the length of the applicant's pre-trial detention and house arrest in breach of the "reasonable time" requirement of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, 5 July 2016)?.Was the procedure by which the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention in conformity with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, 5 July 2016)? In particular, was the principle of equality of arms between the applicant and the prosecution respected in the present case?.
- EGMR, 14.03.2024 - 53928/22
KURUCZ AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
- EGMR, 14.04.2022 - 76862/17
OROSZ AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. - EGMR, 31.03.2022 - 41602/17
SZABBAH AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. - EGMR, 10.02.2022 - 32917/20
BESIROVIC AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. - EGMR, 13.01.2022 - 45021/20
CORNEANU v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. - EGMR, 25.05.2022 - 33687/21
FARKAS AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. - EGMR, 31.03.2022 - 21980/21
BANDER AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. - EGMR, 24.02.2022 - 1561/21
LAKATOS AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. - EGMR, 07.03.2019 - 21763/14
SZEKERES AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
- EGMR - 72159/13 (anhängig)
BACHSITZ v. HUNGARY
- EGMR, 21.07.2022 - 20981/21
INCE AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
- EGMR, 25.05.2022 - 17701/21
HANKÓ AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY