Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 13.11.2012 - 24677/10   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2012,55428
EGMR, 13.11.2012 - 24677/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,55428)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 13.11.2012 - 24677/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,55428)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 13. November 2012 - 24677/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,55428)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,55428) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (8)

  • EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 54436/14

    KLIMOV v. RUSSIA

    The Court has already, in a number of cases in which applicants have died in the course of the proceedings, examined and confirmed the locus standi of their heirs or close relatives, such as brothers or sisters, to pursue the proceedings before the Court, including in cases brought under Article 3 of the Convention (see, among many other authorities, Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 39, ECHR 1999-VI; Malhous v. the Czech Republic (dec.) [GC], no. 33071/96, ECHR 2000-XII; Ergezen v. Turkey, no. 73359/10, § 29, 8 April 2014; Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, §§ 58-68, 13 November 2012; Getiren v. Turkey, no. 10301/03, §§ 61-62, 22 July 2008; and Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 45, 19 May 2004).
  • EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 3933/12

    PISKUNOV v. RUSSIA

    The provisions of domestic law establishing the legal avenues for complaints about the quality of medical services are cited in the following judgments: Patranin v. Russia (no. 12983/14, §§ 86-88, 23 July 2015); Reshetnyak v. Russia (no. 56027/10, §§ 35-46, 8 January 2013); Dirdizov v. Russia (no. 41461/10, §§ 47-61, 27 November 2012); and Koryak v. Russia, (no. 24677/10, §§ 46-57, 13 November 2012).
  • EGMR, 06.12.2016 - 66231/14

    DMITRIYEV v. RUSSIA

    For relevant provisions of domestic law see Koryak v. Russia (no. 24677/10, §§ 46-57, 13 November 2012); Dirdizov v. Russia (no. 41461/10, §§ 47-61, 27 November 2012); and Reshetnyak v. Russia (no. 56027/10, §§ 35-46, 8 January 2013).
  • EGMR, 22.11.2016 - 22254/14

    ERMÉNYI v. HUNGARY

    In accordance with its case-law and considering that the present application involves an important question of general interest, namely, the compatibility with the Convention of the dismissal of the Vice-President of a high national court, the Court finds that the heirs have standing to continue the application in the applicant's stead (see, for instance and mutatis mutandis, Karner v. Austria, no. 40016/98, §§ 25-26, ECHR 2003-IX; Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, § 68, 13 November 2012; and Romankevic v. Lithuania, no. 25747/07, § 16, 2 December 2014).
  • EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 12646/15

    MAYLENSKIY v. RUSSIA

    Having regard to the subject matter of the application and all the information in its possession, the Court considers that the applicant's mother has a legitimate interest in pursuing the application and that she thus has the requisite locus standi under Article 34 of the Convention (see Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, §§ 58-68, 13 November 2012).
  • EGMR, 21.04.2015 - 52025/13

    MUMRYAYEV v. RUSSIA

    It has found that no effective remedies existed in Russia for applicants who complained of ongoing deterioration of their health in view of a lack of proper medical care in detention (see, among others, Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, § 80, 8 January 2013; Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, § 91, 27 November 2012; Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, § 95, 13 November 2012).
  • EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 49038/12

    GUSEV v. RUSSIA

    It has found that no effective remedies existed in Russia for applicants who complained of ongoing deterioration of their health in view of a lack of proper medical care in detention (see, among others, Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, § 95, 13 November 2012; Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, § 91, 27 November 2012; Reshetnyak v. Russia, no. 56027/10, § 80, 8 January 2013).
  • EGMR, 10.07.2014 - 50149/11

    OLEG ZHURAVLEV v. RUSSIA

    Thus, the Court considers whether or not those persons were the applicant's close relatives and had a legitimate interest in pursuing the proceedings, whether an important question of general interest transcending the person and the interests of the applicant exists and whether the rights concerned were transferable (see Koryak v. Russia, no. 24677/10, §§ 60 and 61, 13 November 2012).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht