Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MURSIC v. CROATIA

  Art. 3, Art. 35 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 12.03.2015 - 7334/13
• EGMR, 20.10.2016 - 7334/13

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 20.07.2004 - 47940/99

  BALOGH v. HUNGARY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2015 - 7334/13

  To be effective, a remedy must be capable of directly resolving the impugned state of affairs (see Balogh v. Hungary, no. 47940/99, § 30, 20 July 2004).
• EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04

  POPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2015 - 7334/13

  The State must ensure that a person is detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject him to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, his health and well-being are adequately secured (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 92-94, ECHR 2000-XI, and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 208, 13 July 2006).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2015 - 7334/13

  The State must ensure that a person is detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject him to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, his health and well-being are adequately secured (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 92-94, ECHR 2000-XI, and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 208, 13 July 2006).

 
• EGMR, 22.05.2012 - 5826/03

  IDALOV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2015 - 7334/13

  When assessing conditions of detention, account has to be taken of the cumulative effects of these conditions, as well as of specific allegations made by the applicant (see Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 46, ECHR 2001-II; Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, § 94, 22 May 2012).
• EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00

  MIFSUD contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2015 - 7334/13

  The purpose of Article 35 is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, for example, Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, § 15, ECHR 2002-VIII).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2015 - 7334/13

  It prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances and the victim's behaviour (see, for example, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02

  Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 12.03.2015 - 7334/13

  However, even in the absence of these, where treatment humiliates or debases an individual, showing a lack of respect for or diminishing his or her human dignity, or arouses feelings of fear, anguish or inferiority capable of breaking an individual's moral and physical resistance, it may be characterised as degrading and also fall within the prohibition of Article 3 (see Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 52, ECHR 2002-III, with further references).

• EGMR, 29.10.2015 - 36673/13

  NIAZAI ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE

  En règle générale, il s'agissait de cas où l'espace personnel accordé à un requérant était inférieur à 3 m² (Kantyrev c. Russie, no 37213/02, §§ 50-51, 21 juin 2007, Andreï Frolov c. Russie, no 205/02, §§ 47-49, 29 mars 2007, KadiÄ·is c. Lettonie, no 62393/00, § 55, 4 mai 2006, Melnik c. Ukraine, no 72286/01, § 102, 28 mars 2006 et, a contrario, Mursic c. Croatie, no 7334/13, 12 mars 2015).
• EGMR, 12.11.2015 - 36688/13

  KOUTSOSPYROS ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE

  En règle générale, il s'agissait de cas où l'espace personnel accordé à un requérant était inférieur à 3 m² (Kantyrev c. Russie, no 37213/02, §§ 50-51, 21 juin 2007, Andreï Frolov c. Russie, no 205/02, §§ 47-49, 29 mars 2007, KadiÄ·is c. Lettonie, no 62393/00, § 55, 4 mai 2006, Melnik c. Ukraine, no 72286/01, § 102, 28 mars 2006 et, a contrario, Mursic c. Croatie, no 7334/13, 12 mars 2015).
• EGMR, 25.06.2015 - 60362/13

  LUTANYUK c. GRÈCE

  En règle générale, il s'agissait de cas où l'espace personnel accordé à un requérant était inférieur à 3 m² (Kantyrev c. Russie, no 37213/02, §§ 50-51, 21 juin 2007, Andreï Frolov c. Russie, no 205/02, §§ 47-49, 29 mars 2007, KadiÄ·is c. Lettonie, no 62393/00, § 55, 4 mai 2006, Melnik c. Ukraine, no 72286/01, § 102, 28 mars 2006 et, a contrario, Mursic c. Croatie, no 7334/13, 12 mars 2015).