Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BASYUK v. UKRAINE

  Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  BASYUK v. UKRAINE

  Art. 2, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 7, Art. 13, Art. 34 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (9)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 61164/00

  DURINGER et AUTRES et GRUNGE contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  61164/00 and 18589/02, ECHR 2003-II).
• EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 67208/01

  REHÁK v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  The Court can raise such an objection to the admissibility of the case of its own motion (see Rehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 67208/01, 18 May 2004, and Duringer and Grunge v. France (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 27.09.2007 - 38501/02

  AL FAYED c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  This obligation indisputably applies in the context of designing a framework for protection of life from road traffic accidents (see, for example, Rajkowska v. Poland (dec.), no. 37393/02, 27 November 2007; Al Fayed v. France (dec.), no. 38501/02, §§ 73-78, 27 September 2007; and Railean v. Moldova, no. 23401/04, § 30, 5 January 2010).

 
• EGMR, 25.09.2007 - 42165/02

  HADRABOVA v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  42165/02 and 466/03, 25 September 2007).
• EGMR, 27.11.2007 - 37393/02

  RAJKOWSKA v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  This obligation indisputably applies in the context of designing a framework for protection of life from road traffic accidents (see, for example, Rajkowska v. Poland (dec.), no. 37393/02, 27 November 2007; Al Fayed v. France (dec.), no. 38501/02, §§ 73-78, 27 September 2007; and Railean v. Moldova, no. 23401/04, § 30, 5 January 2010).
• EGMR, 02.12.2008 - 21447/03

  PREDESCU c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  According to the well-established case-law of the Court, failure to inform the Court of relevant factual circumstances may amount to abuse of the right of individual petition, especially if the information concerns the very core of the case and no sufficient explanation is given for the failure to disclose that information (see, e.g., Gross v. Switzerland [GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014; Predescu v. Romania, no. 21447/03, §§ 25-26, 2 December 2008, and Hadrabová and Others v. the Czech Republic (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 15.12.2009 - 4314/02

  KALENDER c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  The first sentence of Article 2 of the Convention requires the States to put in place a legislative and administrative framework designed to provide effective deterrence against threats to the right to life in context of any activity, whether public or not, in which the right to life may be at stake (see, among other authorities, Öneryildiz v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, §§ 89-90, ECHR 2004-XII; Kalender v. Turkey, no. 4314/02, § 51, 15 December 2009; and Krivova v. Ukraine, no. 25732/05, § 44, 9 November 2010).
• EGMR, 09.11.2010 - 25732/05

  KRIVOVA v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  The first sentence of Article 2 of the Convention requires the States to put in place a legislative and administrative framework designed to provide effective deterrence against threats to the right to life in context of any activity, whether public or not, in which the right to life may be at stake (see, among other authorities, Öneryildiz v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, §§ 89-90, ECHR 2004-XII; Kalender v. Turkey, no. 4314/02, § 51, 15 December 2009; and Krivova v. Ukraine, no. 25732/05, § 44, 9 November 2010).
• EGMR, 05.01.2010 - 23401/04

  RAILEAN v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2015 - 51151/10

  This obligation indisputably applies in the context of designing a framework for protection of life from road traffic accidents (see, for example, Rajkowska v. Poland (dec.), no. 37393/02, 27 November 2007; Al Fayed v. France (dec.), no. 38501/02, §§ 73-78, 27 September 2007; and Railean v. Moldova, no. 23401/04, § 30, 5 January 2010).

• EGMR, 30.11.2023 - 17860/17

  GOLOBORODKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  In the leading cases of Kachurka v. Ukraine (no. 4737/06, 15 September 2011), Pozhyvotko v. Ukraine (no. 42752/08, 17 October 2013), and Basyuk v. Ukraine (no. 51151/10, 5 November 2015), the Court already found violations in respect of issues similar to those in the present cases.

  unusually high number of repeated forensic examinations (Basyuk v. Ukraine, no. 51151/10, § 68, 5 November 2015).

• EGMR, 13.01.2022 - 12991/10

  MANDRYKA v. UKRAINE

  In the leading cases of Kachurka v. Ukraine, no. 4737/06, 15 September 2011, Pozhyvotko v. Ukraine, no. 42752/08, 17 October 2013, and Basyuk v. Ukraine, no. 51151/10, 5 November 2015, the Court has already found violations in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

  unusually high number of repeated forensic examinations (Basyuk v. Ukraine, no. 51151/10, § 68, 5 November 2015).

• EGMR, 13.01.2022 - 13094/19

  BOGUTA AND TERESHCHENKO v. UKRAINE

  In the leading cases of Kachurka v. Ukraine, no. 4737/06, 15 September 2011, Pozhyvotko v. Ukraine, no. 42752/08, 17 October 2013 and Basyuk v. Ukraine, no. 51151/10, 5 November 2015 the Court already found violations in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

  unusually high number of repeated forensic examinations (Basyuk v. Ukraine, no. 51151/10, § 68, 5 November 2015),.

 
• EGMR, 18.01.2024 - 44244/19

  KENTESH AND BORODYNYA v. UKRAINE

  In the leading cases of Kachurka v. Ukraine (no. 4737/06, 15 September 2011), Pozhyvotko v. Ukraine (no. 42752/08, 17 October 2013) and Basyuk v. Ukraine (no. 51151/10, 5 November 2015) the Court already found violations in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
• EGMR, 21.09.2023 - 35431/21

  LEZNYUK v. UKRAINE

  In the leading cases of Basyuk v. Ukraine (no. 51151/10, 5 November 2015), Pozhyvotko v. Ukraine (no. 42752/08, 17 October 2013) and Kachurka v. Ukraine (no. 4737/06, 15 September 2011), the Court already found violations in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
• EGMR, 13.01.2022 - 68748/17

  YEFIMOVA AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  In the leading cases of Kachurka v. Ukraine, no. 4737/06, 15 September 2011, Pozhyvotko v. Ukraine, no. 42752/08, 17 October 2013, and Basyuk v. Ukraine, no. 51151/10, 5 November 2015, the Court already found violations in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
• EGMR, 14.02.2019 - 20295/07

  ZORINA AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  The mere fact that the authorities have been informed of the death will give rise ipso facto to an obligation under Article 2 of the Convention to carry out an effective investigation into the circumstances in which it occurred (see, for example, Railean v. Moldova, no. 23401/04, § 28, 5 January 2010; Basyuk v. Ukraine, no. 51151/10, §§ 56-57, 5 November 2015; and Igor Shevchenko v. Ukraine, cited above, § 56).
• EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 49626/07

  TIKHOMIROVA c. RUSSIE

  La Cour rappelle qu'elle a eu l'occasion d'examiner à maintes reprises, sur le terrain de l'article 2 de la Convention, des situations où une perte de vies humaines a résulté d'un accident de la circulation (voir, parmi d'autres, Kotelnikov c. Russie, no 45104/05, § 101, 12 juillet 2016, Basyuk c. Ukraine, no 51151/10, § 56, 5 novembre 2015, Ciobanu c. République de Moldova, no 62578/09, § 32, 24 février 2015, Starcevic c. Croatie, no 80909/12, § 56, 13 novembre 2014, Zubkova c. Ukraine, no 36660/08, § 35, 17 octobre 2013, Prynda c. Ukraine, no 10904/05, § 50, 31 juillet 2012, Sergiyenko c. Ukraine, no 47690/07, § 48, 19 avril 2012, Igor Shevchenko c. Ukraine, no 22737/04, § 56, 12 janvier 2012, Antonov c. Ukraine, no 28096/04, § 44, 3 novembre 2011, et Anna Todorova c. Bulgarie, no 23302/03, § 76, 24 mai 2011).
• EGMR, 25.04.2024 - 69557/13

  USACHENKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  In the leading cases of Kachurka v. Ukraine (no. 4737/06, 15 September 2011), Pozhyvotko v. Ukraine (no. 42752/08, 17 October 2013) and Basyuk v. Ukraine (no. 51151/10, 5 November 2015) the Court has already found violations in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.