Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 12.06.2018 - 60035/12 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2018,20782) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ZALOILO v. THE NETHERLANDS
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 21.02.1984 - 8544/79
Öztürk ./. Deutschland
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.06.2018 - 60035/12
Although the applicability of Article 6 under its criminal head fell to be considered under the so-called "Engel criteria" (Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, § 82, Series A no. 22; see also Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 50, Series A no. 73), which were first developed in a military setting, the Court made "due allowance" for the realities of prison life (see, in particular, Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, 28 June 1984, § 69, Series A no. 80, and Ezeh and Connors v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39665/98 and 40086/98, §§ 82-85, ECHR 2003-X). - EGMR, 28.06.1984 - 7819/77
CAMPBELL AND FELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.06.2018 - 60035/12
Although the applicability of Article 6 under its criminal head fell to be considered under the so-called "Engel criteria" (Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, § 82, Series A no. 22; see also Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 50, Series A no. 73), which were first developed in a military setting, the Court made "due allowance" for the realities of prison life (see, in particular, Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, 28 June 1984, § 69, Series A no. 80, and Ezeh and Connors v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39665/98 and 40086/98, §§ 82-85, ECHR 2003-X). - EGMR, 13.11.2003 - 27156/02
MORBY contre le LUXEMBOURG
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.06.2018 - 60035/12
That being so, and even assuming that an issue could arise under Article 5 of the Convention, the Court is minded to find that the applicant can no longer claim to be a "victim" for purposes of Article 34 of the Convention in this respect (see, among many other authorities, Morby v. Luxembourg (dec.), no. 27156/02, ECHR 2003-XI, and M.A. v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 35242/04, ECHR 2005-VIII). - EGMR, 26.04.2005 - 35242/04
M.A. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 12.06.2018 - 60035/12
That being so, and even assuming that an issue could arise under Article 5 of the Convention, the Court is minded to find that the applicant can no longer claim to be a "victim" for purposes of Article 34 of the Convention in this respect (see, among many other authorities, Morby v. Luxembourg (dec.), no. 27156/02, ECHR 2003-XI, and M.A. v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 35242/04, ECHR 2005-VIII).