Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BORDIKOV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) No violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) No violation of Art. 5-3 No violation of Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 18.10.2007 - 921/03
• EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (18)

• EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

  PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the applicant's conduct and the conduct of the competent authorities (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  The Court reiterates that, in determining the length of detention pending trial under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, the period to be taken into consideration begins on the day the accused is taken into custody and ends on the day when the charge is determined, even if only by a court of first instance (see, among other authorities, Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 9, Series A no. 7, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 145 and 147, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  The Court reiterates that Article 3 of the Convention imposes an obligation on the State to ensure, given the practical demands of imprisonment, that the health and well-being of a prisoner are adequately secured by, among, other things, providing him with the requisite medical assistance (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 93-94, ECHR 2000-XI).

 
• EGMR, 21.12.2000 - 33492/96

  JABLONSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  A person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify the continued detention (see, among other authorities, Castravet v. Moldova, no. 23393/05, §§ 30 and 32, 13 March 2007; McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 41, ECHR 2006-X; Jablonski v. Poland, no. 33492/96, § 83, 21 December 2000; and Neumeister, cited above, § 4).
• EGMR, 15.07.2002 - 47095/99

  Russland, Haftbedingungen, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see, among other authorities, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X; Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005).
• EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 38822/97

  Recht auf Freiheit und Sicherheit (zur Wahrnehmung richterlicher Aufgaben …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  Justification for any period of detention, no matter how short, must be convincingly demonstrated by the authorities (see Shishkov v. Bulgaria, no. 38822/97, § 66, ECHR 2003-I (extracts)).
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 46133/99

  SMIRNOVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  It appears that the Court has also adhered to this approach in some cases where an applicant's detention pending trial before a first-instance court was not continuous, without, however, setting out explicitly the reasons why it considered such periods cumulatively (see Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 34, Series A no. 207; Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 66, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts), and Mitev v. Bulgaria, no. 40063/98, § 102, 22 December 2004).
• EGMR, 22.12.2004 - 40063/98

  MITEV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  It appears that the Court has also adhered to this approach in some cases where an applicant's detention pending trial before a first-instance court was not continuous, without, however, setting out explicitly the reasons why it considered such periods cumulatively (see Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 34, Series A no. 207; Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 66, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts), and Mitev v. Bulgaria, no. 40063/98, § 102, 22 December 2004).
• EGMR, 20.01.2005 - 63378/00

  MAYZIT v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see, among other authorities, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X; Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005).
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

  KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2009 - 921/03

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see, among other authorities, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X; Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005).
• EGMR, 16.01.2007 - 27561/02

  SOLMAZ c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 23393/05

  CASTRAVET v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 66460/01

  NOVOSELOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 62208/00

  LABZOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

  Neumeister ./. Österreich
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64

  Wemhoff ./. Deutschland
• EGMR, 28.03.1990 - 11968/86

  B. ./. Österreich

• EGMR, 05.02.2015 - 46404/13

  KHLOYEV v. RUSSIA

  They also considered the possibility of applying alternative measures, but found them to be inadequate (see, for similar reasoning, Buldashev v. Russia, no. 46793/06, § 99, 18 October 2011 and Bordikov v. Russia, no. 921/03, § 92, 8 October 2009.
• EGMR, 27.11.2014 - 51857/13

  AMIROV v. RUSSIA

  They also considered the possibility of applying alternative measures, but found them to be inadequate (see, for similar reasoning, Buldashev v. Russia, no. 46793/06, § 99, 18 October 2011 and Bordikov v. Russia, no. 921/03, § 92, 8 October 2009.
• EGMR, 19.06.2018 - 61744/11

  N.G. c. RUSSIE

  Il se réfère enfin aux arrêts Bordikov c. Russie (no 921/03, 8 octobre 2009), Pitalev c. Russie (no 34393/03, 30 juillet 2009), Alekhin c. Russie (no 10638/08, 30 juillet 2009), et Khatayev c. Russie (no 56994/09, 11 octobre 2011) où la Cour n'a pas trouvé de violation de l'article 3 de la Convention concernant les soins administrés aux détenus ou a rejeté des griefs similaires pour défaut manifeste de fondement.
• EGMR, 05.02.2013 - 46108/11

  MKHITARYAN v. RUSSIA

  They also considered the possibility of applying alternative measures, but found them to be inadequate (see, for instance, paragraph 14 above) (see, for similar reasoning, Buldashev v. Russia, no. 46793/06, § 99, 18 October 2011 and Bordikov v. Russia, no. 921/03, § 92, 8 October 2009.