Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 41408/04 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,16006) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
KOLPAK v. RUSSIA
Art. 3 MRK
No violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) (englisch)
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Kolpak v. Russia
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93
Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 41408/04
Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336, and Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII). - EGMR, 09.03.2006 - 59261/00
MENECHEVA c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 41408/04
The minimum standards of "effectiveness" defined by the Court's case-law also require that the investigation must be independent, impartial and subject to public scrutiny, and that the competent authorities must act with exemplary diligence and promptness (see, among many other authorities, Menesheva v. Russia, no. 59261/00, § 67, ECHR 2006-III). - EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87
TOMASI c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 41408/04
Otherwise, torture or ill-treatment may be presumed in favour of the claimant and an issue may arise under Article 3 of the Convention (see Tomasi v. France, 27 August 1992, §§ 108-11, Series A no. 241-A, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V). - EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89
KLAAS c. ALLEMAGNE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 41408/04
Where domestic proceedings have taken place, it is not the Court's task to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts and, as a general rule, it is for those courts to assess the evidence before them (see Klaas v. Germany, 22 September 1993, § 29, Series A no. 269). - EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91
RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 41408/04
Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336, and Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII).