Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  RESHETNYAK v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 13, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies) Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 13 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (27)Neu Zitiert selbst (16)

• EGMR, 28.05.2009 - 2052/08

  KOKOSHKINA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  The Court found that, while the possibility of obtaining compensation was not ruled out, the remedy did not offer reasonable prospects of success, in particular because the award was conditional on the establishment of fault on the part of the authorities (see, for instance, Roman Karasev v. Russia, no. 30251/03, §§ 81-85, 25 November 2010; Shilbergs v. Russia, no. 20075/03, §§ 71-79, 17 December 2009; Kokoshkina v. Russia, no. 2052/08, § 52, 28 May 2009; Aleksandr Makarov, cited above, §§ 77 and 87-89; Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 29 and 30, 10 May 2007; Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, §§ 109-116, ECHR 2009; and, most recently, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos.

  A failure on a Government's part to submit such information without a satisfactory explanation may give rise to the drawing of inferences as to the validity of the applicant's allegations (see, among other authorities, Kokoshkina v. Russia, no. 2052/08, § 59, 28 May 2009, and Ahmet Özkan and Others v. Turkey, no. 21689/93, § 426, 6 April 2004).

• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 42525/07

  ANANYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  Accordingly, the Court does not consider that the prison authorities would have a sufficiently independent standpoint to satisfy the requirements of Article 35 of the Convention (see Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, § 113, Series A no. 61): in deciding on a complaint concerning conditions of detention or an inmate's medical care for which they were responsible, they would in reality be judges in their own cause (see Goginashvili v. Georgia, no. 47729/08, § 55, 4 October 2011; and, more recently, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 113-118, 10 January 2012; and Ismatullayev v. Russia (dec.), § 26, 6 March 2012).

  42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 113-118, 10 January 2012).

• EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04

  POPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  The State must ensure that a person is detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure of deprivation of liberty do not subject him to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, his health and well-being are adequately secured (see Kudla, cited above, §§ 92-94, and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 208, 13 July 2006).

 
• EGMR, 26.10.2006 - 59696/00

  KHUDOBIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  The Court reiterates in this regard that even though Article 3 does not entitle a detainee to be released "on compassionate grounds", it has always interpreted the requirement to secure the health and well-being of detainees, among other things, as an obligation on the part of the State to provide detainees with the requisite medical assistance (see Kudla, cited above, § 94; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 95, ECHR 2002-VI; and Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, § 96, ECHR 2006-XII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02

  Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  However, even in the absence of these, where treatment humiliates or debases an individual, showing a lack of respect for or diminishing his or her human dignity, or arouses feelings of fear, anguish or inferiority capable of breaking an individual's moral and physical resistance, it may be characterised as degrading and also fall within the prohibition of Article 3 (see Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 52, ECHR 2002-III, with further references).
• EGMR, 10.05.2007 - 106/02

  BENEDIKTOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  The Court found that, while the possibility of obtaining compensation was not ruled out, the remedy did not offer reasonable prospects of success, in particular because the award was conditional on the establishment of fault on the part of the authorities (see, for instance, Roman Karasev v. Russia, no. 30251/03, §§ 81-85, 25 November 2010; Shilbergs v. Russia, no. 20075/03, §§ 71-79, 17 December 2009; Kokoshkina v. Russia, no. 2052/08, § 52, 28 May 2009; Aleksandr Makarov, cited above, §§ 77 and 87-89; Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 29 and 30, 10 May 2007; Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, §§ 109-116, ECHR 2009; and, most recently, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 33509/04

  BURDOV v. RUSSIA (No. 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  The Court found that, while the possibility of obtaining compensation was not ruled out, the remedy did not offer reasonable prospects of success, in particular because the award was conditional on the establishment of fault on the part of the authorities (see, for instance, Roman Karasev v. Russia, no. 30251/03, §§ 81-85, 25 November 2010; Shilbergs v. Russia, no. 20075/03, §§ 71-79, 17 December 2009; Kokoshkina v. Russia, no. 2052/08, § 52, 28 May 2009; Aleksandr Makarov, cited above, §§ 77 and 87-89; Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 29 and 30, 10 May 2007; Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, §§ 109-116, ECHR 2009; and, most recently, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 17.12.2009 - 20075/03

  SHILBERGS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  The Court found that, while the possibility of obtaining compensation was not ruled out, the remedy did not offer reasonable prospects of success, in particular because the award was conditional on the establishment of fault on the part of the authorities (see, for instance, Roman Karasev v. Russia, no. 30251/03, §§ 81-85, 25 November 2010; Shilbergs v. Russia, no. 20075/03, §§ 71-79, 17 December 2009; Kokoshkina v. Russia, no. 2052/08, § 52, 28 May 2009; Aleksandr Makarov, cited above, §§ 77 and 87-89; Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 29 and 30, 10 May 2007; Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, §§ 109-116, ECHR 2009; and, most recently, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 25.11.2010 - 30251/03

  ROMAN KARASEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  The Court found that, while the possibility of obtaining compensation was not ruled out, the remedy did not offer reasonable prospects of success, in particular because the award was conditional on the establishment of fault on the part of the authorities (see, for instance, Roman Karasev v. Russia, no. 30251/03, §§ 81-85, 25 November 2010; Shilbergs v. Russia, no. 20075/03, §§ 71-79, 17 December 2009; Kokoshkina v. Russia, no. 2052/08, § 52, 28 May 2009; Aleksandr Makarov, cited above, §§ 77 and 87-89; Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 29 and 30, 10 May 2007; Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, §§ 109-116, ECHR 2009; and, most recently, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 18.12.1986 - 9697/82

  JOHNSTON AND OTHERS v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 56027/10

  The existence of the remedies in question must be sufficiently certain not only in theory but also in practice, failing which they will lack the requisite accessibility and effectiveness (see, inter alia, Vernillo v. France, 20 February 1991, § 27, Series A no. 198, and Johnston and Others v. Ireland, 18 December 1986, § 22, Series A no. 112).
• EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7654/76

  VAN OOSTERWIJCK c. BELGIQUE
• EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72

  HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EKMR, 06.09.1995 - 24559/94

  GIBAS c. POLOGNE
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 19.03.1991 - 11069/84

  CARDOT c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72

  SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

• EGMR, 18.04.2024 - 58032/19

  SUNTSOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its well-established case-law (see Tomov and Others, cited above, §§ 92-156, concerning the lack of an effective remedy in that respect of the complaint about inadequate conditions of transport; Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts) and Mariya Alekhina and Others v. Russia, no. 38004/12, 17 July 2018, as regards placement of detainees in a metal cage or a glass cabin during court hearings; Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, 8 January 2013, concerning the authorities' failure to ensure adequate medical assistance to seriously ill prisoners, Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28 November 201, in relation to poor conditions of post-conviction detention and absence of an effective remedy in that regards, and Gorlov and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 18.04.2024 - 46924/19

  GORBUNOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), as regards placement in a metal cage during court hearings; Blokhin v. Russia [GC], no. 47152/06, §§ 120-50, 23 March 2016, and Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, §§ 49-101, 8 January 2013, as regards medical negligence in prison and lack of effective remedies in this respect).
• BVerfG, 19.05.2023 - 2 BvR 78/22

  Erfolgreiche Verfassungsbeschwerde eines Strafgefangenen wegen Versagung einer …

  Bereits zuvor hatte er in mehreren Entscheidungen darauf hingewiesen, dass eine verschuldensabhängige Staatshaftung ("conditional on the establishment of fault") in Konstellationen, in denen regelmäßig ein Entschädigungsanspruch bestehe, den Anforderungen der Konvention nicht gerecht werde (vgl. in Bezug auf menschenunwürdige Haftbedingungen EGMR, Reshetnyak v. Russia, Urteil vom 8. Januar 2013, Nr. 56027/10, § 67; Ananyev and others v. Russia, Urteil vom 10. Januar 2012, Nr. 42525/07 und 60800/08, § 113, jeweils m.w.N.).

 
• EGMR, 22.10.2020 - 6780/18

  ROTH v. GERMANY

  In these circumstances, making the award of compensation conditional on the claimant's ability to prove fault on the part of the authorities and the unlawfulness of their actions may render existing remedies ineffective (see Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 109, ECHR 2009; Ananyev and Others, cited above, § 229, and Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, §§ 66-67, 8 January 2013 with further references).
• EGMR, 26.10.2017 - 28923/09

  AZZOLINA ET AUTRES c. ITALIE

  Cela signifie notamment qu'elle doit tenir compte de manière réaliste du contexte juridique et politique dans lequel les recours s'inscrivent ainsi que de la situation personnelle des requérants (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Akdivar et autres, précité, § 69, Selmouni, précité, § 77, Kozacioglu c. Turquie [GC], no 2334/03, § 40, 19 février 2009, et Reshetnyak c. Russie, no 56027/10, § 58, 8 janvier 2013).
• EGMR, 30.11.2023 - 41090/18

  RESIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  32541/08 and 43441/08, §§ 113-39, ECHR 2014 (extracts), concerning placement in a metal cage in a courtroom during criminal proceedings; Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, 8 January 2013, concerning inadequate medical treatment in detention and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 22.02.2022 - 54547/16

  SHIRKHANYAN v. ARMENIA

  It follows that a complaint of inadequate medical care of and lack of requisite assistance to seriously ill detainees would necessarily call into question the way in which the administration of the detention facility had discharged its duty to ensure adequate health care for detainees (see Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, § 62, 8 January 2013; and Gorbulya, cited above, § 56).
• EGMR, 06.06.2023 - 58262/10

  KAZAN c. TÜRKIYE

  Cela signifie notamment qu'elle doit tenir compte de manière réaliste du contexte juridique et politique dans lequel les recours s'inscrivent ainsi que de la situation personnelle des requérants (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Reshetnyak c. Russie, no 56027/10, § 58, 8 janvier 2013, et Azzolina et autres c. Italie, nos 28923/09 et 67599/10, § 114, 26 octobre 2017).
• EGMR, 28.07.2022 - 55025/17

  AKHPOLOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court has already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see Blokhin, cited above, §§ 120-50, Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, §§ 49-101, 8 January 2013 and Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, §§ 70-110, 13 November 2012).
• EGMR, 20.06.2023 - 62239/12

  KAYMAK ET AUTRES c. TÜRKIYE

  Cela signifie notamment qu'elle doit tenir compte de manière réaliste du contexte juridique et politique dans lequel les recours s'inscrivent ainsi que de la situation personnelle des requérants (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Akdivar et autres, précité, § 69, Selmouni, précité, § 77, Kozacioglu c. Turquie [GC], no 2334/03, § 40, 19 février 2009, Reshetnyak c. Russie, no 56027/10, § 58, 8 janvier 2013, et Azzolina et autres c. Italie, nos 28923/09 et 67599/10, § 114, 26 octobre 2017).
• EGMR, 28.07.2022 - 2556/18

  PISAREV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 07.07.2022 - 69591/17

  YERUSLANOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 09.06.2022 - 17492/16

  NUSALOVA AND LYAPIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 18.01.2022 - 29214/09

  IPEK SOCIÉTÉ À RESPONSABILITÉ LIMITÉE c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 13.10.2022 - 28714/18

  DANILOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.10.2022 - 27314/20

  PONKRATENKO v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 07.07.2022 - 79688/16

  CHERNOUSOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 07.07.2022 - 29389/19

  YEPIKHIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 23.06.2022 - 1993/17

  KOZIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 18.01.2022 - 6800/09

  AKPAZ SOCIÉTÉ À RESPONSABILITÉ LIMITÉE c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 3933/12

  PISKUNOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.10.2017 - 51497/08

  NAUMOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.12.2016 - 66231/14

  DMITRIYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 21.04.2015 - 52025/13

  MUMRYAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 49038/12

  GUSEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 28.07.2022 - 82816/17

  BANCHILA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.01.2022 - 71325/16

  KALMYKOV v. RUSSIA