Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LEWAK v. POLAND

  Art. 8 MRK
  Violation of Art. 8 (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 16.12.1999 - 24888/94

  Mord an James Bulger

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 21890/03

  Any relevance that the latter judgment might possibly have in respect of the present case is therefore reduced by the fact that that it was given after the relevant time (see, for example, V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 57, ECHR 1999-IX).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 21890/03

  Having regard to the procedural requirements of Article 3 (for which, see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000-IV and Dzwonkowski v. Poland, no. 46702/99, §§ 61-62, 12 April 2007), the Court finds that there were no discernible shortcomings in the investigation.
• EGMR, 12.04.2007 - 46702/99

  DZWONKOWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 21890/03

  Having regard to the procedural requirements of Article 3 (for which, see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000-IV and Dzwonkowski v. Poland, no. 46702/99, §§ 61-62, 12 April 2007), the Court finds that there were no discernible shortcomings in the investigation.

• EGMR, 30.11.2010 - 47672/09

  MOCNY v. POLAND

  In numerous cases concerning the monitoring of prisoners" correspondence with the Court it was settled practice that the Court would raise of its own motion the issues of compliance with Article 8 and, in some cases also of compliance with Article 34 of the Convention (see, amongst many others, Pisk-Piskowski v. Poland, no. 92/03, § 20, 14 June 2005; Drozdowski v. Poland, no. 20841/02, § 19, 6 December 2005; Michta v. Poland, no. 13425/02, § 52, 4 May 2006; Maksym v. Poland, no. 14450/02, § 20, 19 December 2006; Lewak v. Poland, no. 21890/03, § 20, 6 September 2007; Kliza v. Poland, no. 8363/04, § 56, 6 September 2007; Kolodzinski v. Poland, no. 44521/04, § 23, 8 January 2008; Dzitkowski v. Poland, no. 35833/03, § 50, 27 November 2007, Stepniak v. Poland, no. 29366/03, § 14, 29 January 2008, Miernicki v. Poland, no. 10847/02, § 75, 27 October 2009).
• EGMR, 20.05.2008 - 31038/06

  ANDRYSIAK v. POLAND

  Any relevance the latter judgment might have to the present case is therefore reduced by the fact that it was delivered after the relevant time (see, for example, V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 57, ECHR 1999-IX; Lewak v. Poland, no. 21890/03, § 22-25, 6 September 2007).
• EGMR, 22.04.2008 - 39519/05

  ZBOROWSKI v. POLAND (N° 3)

  Any relevance the latter judgment might have to the present case is therefore reduced by the fact that it was delivered after the relevant time (see, for example, V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 57, ECHR 1999-IX; Lewak v. Poland, no 21890/03, § 22-25, 6 September 2007).
• EGMR, 15.01.2008 - 45133/06

  ZBOROWSKI v. POLAND

  Any relevance that the latter judgment might possibly have in respect of the present case is therefore reduced by the fact that that it was given after the relevant time (see, for example, V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 57, ECHR 1999-IX; Lewak v. Poland, no. 21890/03, § 22-25, 6 September 2007).