Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,56075) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
POPANDOPULO v. RUSSIA
Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 13+3, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) No violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 13 Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) No violation of Art. 6-1 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (18)
- EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95
LABITA c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
The Convention prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances or the victim's behaviour (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV). - EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93
Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
However, such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII). - EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
Although measures depriving a person of his liberty may often involve such an element, in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention the State must ensure that a person is detained under conditions which are compatible with respect for his human dignity and that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject him to distress or hardship exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 92-94, ECHR 2000-XI).
- EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95
PEERS v. GREECE
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
Thus, even in cases where a larger prison cell was in issue - measuring between three and four square metres per inmate - the Court found a violation of Article 3 since the space factor was coupled with an established lack of ventilation and lighting (see Aleksandr Makarov v. Russia, no. 15217/07, § 98, 12 March 2009; Vlasov v. Russia, no. 78146/01, § 84, 12 June 2008; Babushkin v. Russia, no. 67253/01, § 44, 18 October 2007; Trepashkin v. Russia, no. 36898/03, § 94, 19 July 2007; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 70-72, ECHR 2001-III). - EGMR, 20.01.2005 - 63378/00
MAYZIT v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
The Court further reiterates that in certain cases the lack of personal space afforded to detainees in Russian remand prisons was so extreme as to justify, in its own right, a finding of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention (see, for example, Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 33 et seq., 10 May 2007; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI). - EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57948/00
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
The minimum standards as to effectiveness defined by the Court's case-law also include the requirements that the investigation must be independent, impartial and subject to public scrutiny, and that the competent authorities must act with exemplary diligence and promptness (see Isayeva and Others v. Russia, nos. 57947/00, 57948/00 and 57949/00, §§ 208-13, 24 February 2005, and Menesheva v. Russia, no. 59261/00, § 67, ECHR 2006-III). - EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 66460/01
NOVOSELOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
The Court further reiterates that in certain cases the lack of personal space afforded to detainees in Russian remand prisons was so extreme as to justify, in its own right, a finding of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention (see, for example, Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 33 et seq., 10 May 2007; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI). - EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 62208/00
LABZOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
The Court further reiterates that in certain cases the lack of personal space afforded to detainees in Russian remand prisons was so extreme as to justify, in its own right, a finding of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention (see, for example, Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 33 et seq., 10 May 2007; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI). - EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02
KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
The Court further reiterates that in certain cases the lack of personal space afforded to detainees in Russian remand prisons was so extreme as to justify, in its own right, a finding of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention (see, for example, Benediktov v. Russia, no. 106/02, §§ 33 et seq., 10 May 2007; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI). - EGMR, 09.03.2006 - 59261/00
MENECHEVA c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 4512/09
The minimum standards as to effectiveness defined by the Court's case-law also include the requirements that the investigation must be independent, impartial and subject to public scrutiny, and that the competent authorities must act with exemplary diligence and promptness (see Isayeva and Others v. Russia, nos. 57947/00, 57948/00 and 57949/00, §§ 208-13, 24 February 2005, and Menesheva v. Russia, no. 59261/00, § 67, ECHR 2006-III). - EGMR, 10.05.2007 - 106/02
BENEDIKTOV v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 19.07.2007 - 36898/03
TREPASHKIN v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 18.10.2007 - 67253/01
BABUSHKIN v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 12.06.2008 - 78146/01
VLASOV v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 15217/07
ALEKSANDR MAKAROV v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91
RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE
- EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99
PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI
- EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93
MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY
- EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 2335/09
TKACHUK c. RUSSIE
- EGMR, 07.11.2017 - 19816/09
BAMBAYEV c. RUSSIE
Il se réfère sur ce deuxième point aux montants alloués par la Cour à titre de préjudice moral dans ses arrêts concernant des cas de mauvais traitements infligés par des agents de l'État, notamment Dmitrachkov c. Russie (no 18825/02, 16 septembre 2010), Kuzmenko c. Russie (no 18541/04, 21 décembre 2010) et Popandopulo c. Russie (no 4512/09, 10 mai 2011).