Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PANAITESCU v. ROMANIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Life) (Procedural aspect) Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage Pecuniary damage) ...

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Panaitescu v. Romania

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

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

• EGMR, 07.05.2002 - 59498/00

  BURDOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 30909/06

  The Court further considers in this connection that, just as it is not open to a State authority to cite lack of funds or resources as an excuse for not honouring a judgment debt (see, mutatis mutandis, Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 35, ECHR 2002-III), the same principle applies a fortiori when there is a need to secure the practical and effective protection of the right protected by Article 2, a right fundamental in the scheme of the Convention.
• EGMR, 04.05.2000 - 45305/99

  POWELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 30909/06

  The Court has accepted that it cannot be excluded that the acts and omissions of the authorities in the field of health care policy may in certain circumstances engage their responsibility under Article 2. However, where a Contracting State has made adequate provision for securing high professional standards among health professionals and the protection of the lives of patients, it cannot accept that matters such as error of judgment on the part of a health professional or negligent co-ordination among health professionals in the treatment of a particular patient are sufficient of themselves to call a Contracting State to account from the standpoint of its positive obligations under Article 2 of the Convention to protect life (see Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V, and Öneryıldız v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, § 71, ECHR 2004-XII).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 21.06.2018 - C-391/16

  Nach Auffassung von Generalanwalt Wathelet sind die Bestimmungen der Richtlinie …

  79 Vgl. zur Tragweite von Art. 2 Abs. 1 und Art. 3 EMRK (die Art. 2 Abs. 1 bzw. Art. 4 der Charta entsprechen) Urteil des EGMR vom 10. April 2012, Panaitescu/Rumänien (CE:ECHR:2012:0410JUD003090906, Nrn. 27 bis 30 und die dort angeführte Rechtsprechung).