Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MOGILAT v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3 MRK
  No violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Mogilat v. Russia

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 8461/03

  Such an investigation should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 8461/03

  Such an investigation should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 18.03.2010 - 43233/02

  MAKSIMOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 8461/03

  As regards the quality of the expert examination carried out from 4-6 December 2001, the Court reiterates that proper medical examinations are an essential safeguard against ill-treatment (see Akkoç v. Turkey, nos. 22947/93 and 22948/93, §§ 55 and 118, ECHR 2000-X, and numerous cases concerning Russia, for instance, Maksimov v. Russia, no. 43233/02, § 88, 18 March 2010).

 
• EGMR, 19.03.1991 - 11069/84

  CARDOT c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 8461/03

  It normally also requires that the complaints intended to be brought subsequently before the Court should have been made to those same courts, at least in substance and in compliance with the formal requirements and time-limits laid down in domestic law (see, among other authorities, Cardot v. France, 19 March 1991, § 34, Series A no. 200).
• EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89

  KLAAS c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 8461/03

  The Court also reiterates that 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 - 8461/03

  In respect of a person deprived of his liberty, any recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by his own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see Sheydayev v. Russia, no. 65859/01, § 59, 7 December 2006; Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 38, Series A no. 336; and Krastanov v. Bulgaria, no. 50222/99, § 53, 30 September 2004).

• EGMR, 01.09.2020 - 30050/09

  SHISHKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court considers that such delay put into question the experts" ability to provide adequate answers to the questions raised by the investigating authority (see Mogilat v. Russia, no. 8461/03, § 64, 13 March 2012).
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 23559/07

  OLEYNIK c. RUSSIE

  La Cour conclut que le Gouvernement n'a pas fourni d'explication plausible sur l'origine des lésions subies par l'intéressé (voir, a contrario, Mogilat c. Russie, no 8461/03, §§ 54-55, 13 mars 2012, où les policiers avaient présenté des rapports consignant les circonstances de l'arrestation et de la résistance du requérant et faisant état d'un recours à la force lors de l'arrestation, sans susciter d'objections de la part du requérant).