Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GHULAMI c. FRANCE

  Art. 3, Art. 13, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 4 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2009 - 45302/05

  Concernant le grief tiré des articles 3 et 13 de la Convention, la Cour rappelle que l'article 13 de la Convention garantit l'existence en droit interne d'un recours permettant d'examiner le contenu d'un «grief défendable» fondé sur la Convention et d'offrir un redressement approprié (voir, parmi d'autres, Kudla c. Pologne [GC], no 30210/96, § 157, CEDH 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 05.02.2002 - 51564/99

  Belgien, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, Abschiebunghaft, Freiheit …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.04.2009 - 45302/05

  Se référant à l'arrêt Conka c. Belgique (no 51564/99, CEDH 2002-I), le Gouvernement ne considère pas en l'espèce qu'il y a eu expulsion collective.

• EGMR, 23.02.2012 - 27765/09

  Italiens Flüchtlingspolitik: Rechte auch auf hoher See

  That definition was used subsequently by the Convention bodies in other cases concerning Article 4 of Protocol No. 4. The Court observes that the majority of such cases involved persons who were on the territory at issue (see K.G. v. the F.R.G., no. 7704/76, Commission Decision of 1 March 1977; O. and Others v. Luxembourg, no. 7757/77, Commission Decision of 3 March 1978; A. and Others v. the Netherlands, no. 14209/88, Commission Decision of 16 December 1988; Andric v. Sweden (dec), no. 45917/99, 23 February 1999; Conka v. Belgium, no. 51564/99, ECHR 2002-I; Davydov v. Estonia (dec), no. 16387/03, 31 May 2005; Berisha and Haljiti v. "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", no. 18670/03, decision of 16 June 2005; Sultani v. France, no. 45223/05, ECHR 2007-X; Ghulami v. France (dec), no. 45302/05, 7 April 2009; and Dritsas v. Italy (dec), no. 2344/02, 1 February 2011).
• EGMR, 24.03.2020 - 24917/15

  ASADY AND OTHERS v. SLOVAKIA

  According to that case-law, an expulsion is deemed to be "collective" for the purposes of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 if it compels aliens, as a group, to leave a country, "except where such a measure is taken on the basis of a reasonable and objective examination of the particular case of each individual alien of the group" (see Khlaifia and Others, cited above, §§ 237 et seq.; Georgia v. Russia (I), cited above, § 167; Andric v. Sweden (dec.), no. 45917/99, 23 February 1999; Davydov v. Estonia (dec.), no. 16387/03, 31 May 2005; Sultani v. France, no. 45223/05, § 81, ECHR 2007-IV (extracts); and Ghulami v. France (dec.), no. 45302/05, 7 April 2009).