Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 2192/03 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2006,57203) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
HARKMANN v. ESTONIA
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. b, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 5-5 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - financial award (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 2192/03
- EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 2192/03
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 29.04.1999 - 25642/94
Anforderungen an die unverzügliche Vorführung der festgenommenen Person i.S.d. …
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 2192/03
The Court reiterates that Article 5 § 3 of the Convention provides persons arrested or detained on suspicion of having committed a criminal offence with a guarantee against any arbitrary or unjustified deprivation of liberty (see, for example, Aquilina v. Malta [GC], no. 25642/94, § 47, ECHR 1999-III). - EGMR, 22.05.1984 - 8805/79
DE JONG, BALJET ET VAN DEN BRINK c. PAYS-BAS
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 2192/03
Article 5 § 3 is aimed at ensuring prompt and automatic judicial control of police or administrative detention ordered in accordance with the provisions of Article 5 § 1 (c) (see De Jong, Baljet and Van den Brink v. the Netherlands, judgment of 22 May 1984, Series A no. 77, p. 24, § 51 and Aquilina, cited above, §§ 48-49). - EGMR, 04.12.1979 - 7710/76
Schiesser ./. Schweiz
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 2192/03
The procedural requirement places the "officer" under the obligation of hearing himself the individual brought before him; the substantive requirement imposes on him the obligations of reviewing the circumstances militating for or against detention, of deciding, by reference to legal criteria, whether there are reasons to justify detention and of ordering release if there are no such reasons (see Schiesser v. Switzerland, judgment of 4 December 1979, Series A no. 34, pp. 13-14, § 31, with further references). - EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86
LETELLIER c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 2192/03
The Court considers that the applicant was released before an issue under Article 5 § 4 could arise (see, for comparison and mutatis mutandis, Letellier v. France, judgment of 26 June 1991, Series A no. 207, p. 22, § 56).