Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GUTU v. MOLDOVA

  Art. 3, Art. ... 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 6 Abs. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 13, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41, Art. 13+5, Art. 13+8 MRK
  Violation of Art. 5-1 Violation of Art. 6-1 Not necessary to examine Art. 6-3 Violation of Art. 8 Violation of Art. 13+5 Violation of Art. 13+8 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings ...

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 06.12.1988 - 10588/83

  BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 20289/02

  As regards the complaint about the alleged breach of the presumption of innocence, the Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence guaranteed by Article 6 § 2 of the Convention requires, inter alia, that when carrying out their duties, the members of a court should not start with the preconceived idea that the accused has committed the offence charged; the burden of proof is on the prosecution, and any doubt should benefit the accused (see, among other authorities, the Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain judgment of 6 December 1988, Series A no. 146, § 77).
• EGMR, 25.03.1992 - 13590/88

  CAMPBELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 20289/02

  An interference will contravene Article 8 unless it is "in accordance with the law", pursues one or more of the legitimate aims referred to in paragraph 2 and furthermore is "necessary in a democratic society" in order to achieve the aim (see the following judgments: Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, p. 32, § 84; Campbell v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1992, Series A no. 233, p. 16, § 34; Calogero Diana v. Italy, 15 November 1996, Reports 1996-V, p. 1775, § 28; and Petra v. Romania, 23 September 1998, Reports 1998-VII, p. 2853, § 36).
• EGMR, 20.04.2004 - 60115/00

  Meinungsfreiheit von Rechtsanwälten bei der öffentlichen Kritik von …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 20289/02

  The Court reiterates that in order for costs and expenses to be included in an award under Article 41 of the Convention, it must be established that they were actually and necessarily incurred and were reasonable as to quantum (see, for example, Amihalachioaie v. Moldova, no. 60115/00, § 47, ECHR 2004-III).
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72

  SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 20289/02

  An interference will contravene Article 8 unless it is "in accordance with the law", pursues one or more of the legitimate aims referred to in paragraph 2 and furthermore is "necessary in a democratic society" in order to achieve the aim (see the following judgments: Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, p. 32, § 84; Campbell v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1992, Series A no. 233, p. 16, § 34; Calogero Diana v. Italy, 15 November 1996, Reports 1996-V, p. 1775, § 28; and Petra v. Romania, 23 September 1998, Reports 1998-VII, p. 2853, § 36).
• EGMR, 25.10.2005 - 5140/02

  FEDOTOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 20289/02

  The Court must in addition be satisfied that detention during the period under consideration was compatible with the purpose of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention, which is to prevent persons from being deprived of their liberty in an arbitrary fashion (see Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 154, ECHR 2002-IV, and Fedotov v. Russia, no. 5140/02, § 74, 25 October 2005).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 22.02.2018 - C-59/17

  SCI Château du Grand Bois

  32 Vgl. entsprechend z. B. Urteil des EGMR vom 7. Juni 2007, Gutu/Moldau (CE:ECHR:2007:0607JUD002028902, Rn. 65), in dem festgestellt wurde, dass das unerlaubte Betreten des Grundstücks der Beschwerdeführerin - ihres Vorgartens - einen Eingriff in ihr Recht auf Unverletzlichkeit der Wohnung darstellt.
• EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 69527/10

  VASÎLCA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  In this case, the applicant had a strong and legitimate interest in the conduct of the investigation which would have been served by granting her the special status under the Code of Criminal Procedure (see paragraph 21 above; see also Gutu v. Moldova, no. 20289/02, § 61, 7 June 2007 and Matasaru and Savitchi v. Moldova, no. 38281/08, § 90, 2 November 2010 concerning the procedural shortcomings where no proper criminal investigation is initiated).
• EGMR, 16.03.2021 - 4936/12

  TOMAC c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA

  Elle rappelle avoir déjà eu l'occasion de constater que, dans le droit moldave, aucune mesure d'investigation ne pouvait être effectuée avant l'ouverture formelle d'une enquête pénale (Gutu c. Moldova, no 20289/02, § 61, 7 juin 2007, et Matasaru et Savitchi c. Moldova, no 38281/08, § 90, 2 novembre 2010).
• EGMR, 21.01.2014 - 47804/07

  GUTU c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA

  La Cour a établi dans un certain nombre d'affaires, dont celles dirigées contre la République de Moldova, sa pratique en ce qui concerne les griefs tirés de la violation de l'article 5 §§ 1, 3 et 4 de la Convention (voir, par exemple, Sarban c. Moldova, no 3456/05, §§ 95-104, 4 octobre 2005 ; Becciev c. Moldova, no 9190/03, §§ 53-64, 4 octobre 2005 ; Boicenco c. Moldova, no 41088/05, §§ 139-145, 148-154, 11 juillet 2006 ; Gutu c. Moldova, no 20289/02, §§ 58-62, 7 juin 2007, et Musuc c. Moldova, no 42440/06, §§ 37-47, 49-57, 6 novembre 2007).