Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GARAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Art. 3, Art. 13, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f MRK
  Violation of Art. 3 (in case of extradition) Violation of Art. 13 Violation of Art. 5-1-f (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 28358/95

  BARANOWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 53688/08

  It is therefore essential that the conditions for deprivation of liberty under domestic law be clearly defined and that the law itself be foreseeable in its application, so that it meets the standard of "lawfulness" set by the Convention, a standard which requires that all laws be sufficiently precise to allow the person - if need be, with appropriate advice - to foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action may entail, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX, and Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 53688/08

  It is therefore essential that the conditions for deprivation of liberty under domestic law be clearly defined and that the law itself be foreseeable in its application, so that it meets the standard of "lawfulness" set by the Convention, a standard which requires that all laws be sufficiently precise to allow the person - if need be, with appropriate advice - to foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action may entail, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX, and Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 53688/08

  As a general rule, if a single remedy does not by itself entirely satisfy the requirements of Article 13, the aggregate of remedies provided for under domestic law may do so (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 157, ECHR 2000-XI).

 
• EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87

  VILVARAJAH ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 53688/08

  In cases such as the present, the Court must examine the foreseeable consequences of sending the applicant to the receiving country, bearing in mind the general situation there and his personal circumstances (see Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom, 30 October 1991, § 108 in fine, Series A no. 215).
• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

  Jens Söring

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 53688/08

  In so far as any liability under the Convention is or may be incurred, it is liability incurred by the extraditing Contracting State by reason of its having taken action which has as a direct consequence the exposure of an individual to proscribed ill-treatment (see Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, §§ 90-91, Series A no. 161).
• EGMR, 20.03.1991 - 15576/89

  CRUZ VARAS ET AUTRES c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 53688/08

  In determining whether it has been shown that the applicant runs a real risk, if expelled, of suffering treatment proscribed by Article 3, the Court will assess the issue in the light of all the material placed before it, or, if necessary, material obtained proprio motu (see Cruz Varas and Others v. Sweden, 20 March 1991, § 75, Series A no. 201).

• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 8139/09

  Othman (Abu Qatada) ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

  Ben Khemais v. Italy, no. 246/07, § 59, ECHR 2009-... (extracts); Garayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 53688/08, § 74, 10 June 2010; Baysakov and Others v. Ukraine, no. 54131/08, § 51, 18 February 2010; Soldatenko v. Ukraine, no. 2440/07, § 73, 23 October 2008);.
• EGMR, 07.09.2023 - 37726/21

  COMPAORÉ c. FRANCE

  Pour que ce critère soit effectif, la Cour a déjà été amenée à vérifier que l'autorité émettrice des assurances représentait suffisamment l'État en question (voir, pour un exemple en ce sens, Othman (Abu Qatada), précité, ibidem, et, a contrario, Soldatenko c. Ukraine, no 2440/07, § 73, 23 octobre 2008, Ben Khemais c. Italie, no 246/07, § 59, 24 février 2009, Baysakov et autres c. Ukraine, no 54131/08, § 51, 18 février 2010, et Garayev c. Azerbaïdjan, no 53688/08, § 74, 10 juin 2010).
• EGMR, 19.05.2016 - 37289/12

  J.N. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Factors relevant to this assessment of the "quality of law" - which are referred to in some cases as "safeguards against arbitrariness" - will include the existence of clear legal provisions for ordering detention, for extending detention, and for setting time-limits for detention (Abdolkhani and Karimnia, cited above, § 135 and Garayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 53688/08, § 99, 10 June 2010); and the existence of an effective remedy by which the applicant can contest the "lawfulness" and "length" of his continuing detention (Louled Massoud v. Malta, no. 24340/08, § 71, 27 July 2010).

 
• EGMR, 15.05.2012 - 33809/08

  LABSI v. SLOVAKIA

  The relevant principles are summed up, for example, in Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 27765/09, §§ 113-121, 23 February 2012; Saadi v. Italy [GC], no. 37201/06, §§ 124-148, ECHR 2008; Boutagni v. France, no. 42360/08, §§ 44-45, 18 November 2010; Ismoilov and Others v. Russia, no. 2947/06, §§ 115, 126 and 127, 24 April 2008; Khaydarov v. Russia, no. 21055/09, §§ 96-100 and 111, 20 May 2010; Shamayev and Others v. Georgia and Russia, no. 36378/02, §§ 334-339 and 344, ECHR 2005-III; Garayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 53688/08, §§ 67-75, 10 June 2010; Kolesnik v. Russia, no. 26876/08, § 73, 17 June 2010; Ben Khemais v. Italy, no. 246/07, §§ 53-64, 24 February 2009; or Koktysh v. Ukraine, no. 43707/07, §§ 57-59 and 63-64, 10 December 2009.
• VG Münster, 11.08.2010 - 8 K 1401/10

  Kein Asyl für ein 2009 in Deutschland geborenes Kind mit libanesischen Eltern …

  Dass hieraus für die Klägerin eine erhebliche konkrete Gefahr für Leib, Leben oder Freiheit im Sinne des § 60 Abs. 7 Satz 1 AufenthG erwächst, ist aber ebenso wenig ersichtlich, wie ein Verstoß gegen § 60 Abs. 5 AufenthG in Verbindung mit Art. 3 EMRK, vgl. auch EGMR, Urteile vom 27. Mai 2008, 26565/05, N., NVwZ 2008, 1334, und vom 10. Juni 2010, 53688/08, Garayev, Rn. 69, http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-en.
• EGMR, 14.11.2013 - 56688/12

  CHANKAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  However, the Court notes that, despite the fact that the applicant had explicitly complained before the Sabayil District Court and the Baku Court of Appeal of the risk of torture or ill-treatment and that his allegations in this regard were arguable, the domestic courts ignored his arguments and their decisions were silent in this regard (compare Garayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 53688/08, § 84, 10 June 2010).