Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KAROLY v. ROMANIA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3 MRK
  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Karoly v. Romania

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05
• EGMR, 04.03.2015 - 33682/05

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64

  Wemhoff ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05

  The Court reiterates that 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 individual's continued detention (see, as classic authorities, Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 12, Series A no. 7, and Yagci and Sargin v. Turkey, 8 June 1995, § 52, Series A no. 319-A).
• EGMR, 10.11.1969 - 1602/62

  Stögmüller ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05

  Those are the risks that, if released, the accused will: fail to appear for trial (see Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9); interfere with the administration of justice (see Wemhoff, cited above, § 14); commit further offences (see Matznetter v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 9, Series A no. 10); or cause public disorder (see Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207).
• EGMR, 26.01.1993 - 14379/88

  W. c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05

  Regard must be had in particular to the character of the person involved, his morals, his assets, his links with the State in which he is being prosecuted and his international contacts (see W. v. Switzerland, 26 January 1993, § 33, Series A no. 254-A, and the further references cited therein).

 
• EGMR, 03.06.2003 - 33343/96

  PANTEA c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05

  The relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure concerning placement in pre-trial detention and the extension of pre-trial detention during a criminal trial, in force at the relevant time, are described in Pantea v. Romania (no. 33343/96, § 150, CEDH 2003-VI).
• EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90

  YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05

  The Court reiterates that 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 individual's continued detention (see, as classic authorities, Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 12, Series A no. 7, and Yagci and Sargin v. Turkey, 8 June 1995, § 52, Series A no. 319-A).
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05

  Those are the risks that, if released, the accused will: fail to appear for trial (see Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9); interfere with the administration of justice (see Wemhoff, cited above, § 14); commit further offences (see Matznetter v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 9, Series A no. 10); or cause public disorder (see Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207).
• EGMR, 12.12.1991 - 12718/87

  CLOOTH v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05

  Arguments for and against release must not be "general and abstract" (see Clooth v. Belgium, 12 December 1991, § 44, Series A no. 225).
• EGMR, 10.11.1969 - 2178/64

  Matznetter ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33682/05

  Those are the risks that, if released, the accused will: fail to appear for trial (see Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9); interfere with the administration of justice (see Wemhoff, cited above, § 14); commit further offences (see Matznetter v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 9, Series A no. 10); or cause public disorder (see Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207).