Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MICHALAK v. SLOVAKIA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 13+8, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violations of Art. 5-4 Violation of Art. 5-5 Violation of Art. 13+8 Remainder inadmissible Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03
• EGMR, 07.05.2013 - 30157/03

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95

  WLOCH v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  In these circumstances the Court finds it appropriate to examine both sets of proceedings under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention together (see, mutatis mutandis, Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  The basis of the applicant's claim therefore has to be considered "arguable" for the purposes of Article 13, in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, p. 23, § 52).
• EGMR, 26.10.1984 - 9186/80

  DE CUBBER v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  It concludes that, to the extent that the relevant part of the applicant's complaint under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention has been substantiated, any possible irregularity in the composition of the bench of the first-instance court was repaired by the re-examination of the case on the applicant's interlocutory appeal (see, mutatis mutandis, De Cubber v. Belgium, 26 October 1984, § 33, Series A no. 86, p. 19).

 
• EGMR, 20.06.2006 - 69146/01

  BABYLONOVA v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  The relevant statutory provisions and judicial practice are summarised in Furdík v. Slovakia ((dec.), no. 42994/05, 2 December 2008), Kontrová v. Slovakia (no. 7510/04, §§ 33 to 35, ECHR 2007-VI (extracts)), Nesták v. Slovakia (no. 65559/01, §§ 48-52, 27 February 2007), Pavlík v. Slovakia (no. 74827/01, §§ 62 to 66, 30 January 2007), Kvasnica v. Slovakia ((dec.) no. 72094/01, 26 September 2006), Babylonová v. Slovakia (no. 69146/01, § 21, ECHR 2006-VIII), Kontrová v. Slovakia (cited above (dec.), 13 June 2006) and Varga v. Slovakia ((dec.), no. 47811/99, 22 June 2004).
• EGMR, 10.08.2006 - 56308/00

  TOSHEV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  In view of the Constitutional Court's conclusions and its limited power to review questions of compliance with national law (see, for example, Toshev v. Bulgaria, no. 56308/00, § 58, 10 August 2006, and Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, § 84, ECHR 2005-IV), the Court concludes that the territorial jurisdiction of the ordinary courts in Trencín over the applicant's detention case had a legal basis in domestic law and had been established in accordance with the applicable rules.
• EGMR, 03.10.2006 - 543/03

  McKAY c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  At the same time, regard being had to the early stage of the criminal proceedings against him (see, for example, McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 45, ECHR 2006-X) and of the restriction of his liberty (by way of contrast, see paragraphs 127 to 132 below), the Court considers that the suspicion against the applicant relied on by the domestic authorities was reasonable within the meaning of the previously cited case-law.
• EGMR, 30.01.2007 - 74827/01

  PAVLIK v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  The relevant statutory provisions and judicial practice are summarised in Furdík v. Slovakia ((dec.), no. 42994/05, 2 December 2008), Kontrová v. Slovakia (no. 7510/04, §§ 33 to 35, ECHR 2007-VI (extracts)), Nesták v. Slovakia (no. 65559/01, §§ 48-52, 27 February 2007), Pavlík v. Slovakia (no. 74827/01, §§ 62 to 66, 30 January 2007), Kvasnica v. Slovakia ((dec.) no. 72094/01, 26 September 2006), Babylonová v. Slovakia (no. 69146/01, § 21, ECHR 2006-VIII), Kontrová v. Slovakia (cited above (dec.), 13 June 2006) and Varga v. Slovakia ((dec.), no. 47811/99, 22 June 2004).
• EGMR, 27.02.2007 - 65559/01

  NESTAK v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  The relevant statutory provisions and judicial practice are summarised in Furdík v. Slovakia ((dec.), no. 42994/05, 2 December 2008), Kontrová v. Slovakia (no. 7510/04, §§ 33 to 35, ECHR 2007-VI (extracts)), Nesták v. Slovakia (no. 65559/01, §§ 48-52, 27 February 2007), Pavlík v. Slovakia (no. 74827/01, §§ 62 to 66, 30 January 2007), Kvasnica v. Slovakia ((dec.) no. 72094/01, 26 September 2006), Babylonová v. Slovakia (no. 69146/01, § 21, ECHR 2006-VIII), Kontrová v. Slovakia (cited above (dec.), 13 June 2006) and Varga v. Slovakia ((dec.), no. 47811/99, 22 June 2004).
• EGMR, 02.12.2008 - 42994/05

  FURDIK v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.02.2011 - 30157/03

  The relevant statutory provisions and judicial practice are summarised in Furdík v. Slovakia ((dec.), no. 42994/05, 2 December 2008), Kontrová v. Slovakia (no. 7510/04, §§ 33 to 35, ECHR 2007-VI (extracts)), Nesták v. Slovakia (no. 65559/01, §§ 48-52, 27 February 2007), Pavlík v. Slovakia (no. 74827/01, §§ 62 to 66, 30 January 2007), Kvasnica v. Slovakia ((dec.) no. 72094/01, 26 September 2006), Babylonová v. Slovakia (no. 69146/01, § 21, ECHR 2006-VIII), Kontrová v. Slovakia (cited above (dec.), 13 June 2006) and Varga v. Slovakia ((dec.), no. 47811/99, 22 June 2004).