Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 14.03.2013 - 28005/08   

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen.

Sie haben noch kein Nutzerkonto? In weniger als einer Minute ist es eingerichtet und Sie können sofort diese und weitere kostenlose Zusatzfunktionen nutzen.

| | Was ist die Merkfunktion?
Ablegen in
Benachrichtigen, wenn:




 
Alle auswählen
 

Zitiervorschläge

https://dejure.org/2013,3868
EGMR, 14.03.2013 - 28005/08 (https://dejure.org/2013,3868)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 14.03.2013 - 28005/08 (https://dejure.org/2013,3868)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 14. März 2013 - 28005/08 (https://dejure.org/2013,3868)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2013,3868) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    SALAKHOV AND ISLYAMOVA v. UKRAINE

    Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
    Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 34 - Individual applications (Article 34 - Hinder the exercise of the right of petition) Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)




Kontextvorschau:





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

Wird zitiert von ... (24)  

  • EGMR, 21.10.2013 - 55508/07

    Massaker von Katyn

    Nevertheless, the Court has considered a separate finding of a violation of Article 3 to be justified in situations of confirmed death where the applicants were direct witnesses to the suffering of their family members (see Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, § 204, 14 March 2013, where the applicant witnessed the slow death of her son who was in detention, without being able to help him; Esmukhambetov and Others v. Russia, no. 23445/03, § 190, 29 March 2011, where a violation of Article 3 was found in respect of an applicant who had witnessed the killing of his entire family, but no violation was found in respect of other applicants who had only later found out about the killings; Khadzhialiyev and Others v. Russia, no. 3013/04, § 121, 6 November 2008, where the applicants were unable to bury the dismembered and decapitated bodies of their children in a proper manner; Musayev and Others v. Russia, nos.
  • EGMR, 27.11.2014 - 51857/13

    AMIROV v. RUSSIA

    In so doing, the State has frustrated the purpose of the interim measure, which sought to enable the Court, on the basis of a relevant independent medical opinion, to effectively respond to and, if need be, prevent the possible continuous exposure of the applicant to physical and mental suffering in violation of the guarantees of Article 3 of the Convention (see Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, § 222, 14 March 2013.
  • EGMR, 22.10.2015 - 40512/13

    SERGEY ANTONOV v. UKRAINE

    The Court notes that the issue of inadequate medical assistance for people with HIV in Ukrainian detention facilities has already been addressed by the Court in a number of cases (see Kats and Others v. Ukraine, no. 29971/04, 18 December 2008; Pokhlebin v. Ukraine, no. 35581/06, 20 May 2010; and Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, 14 March 2013).
  • EGMR, 23.10.2014 - 28403/05

    VINTMAN v. UKRAINE

    Conversely, the Government's failure to provide pertinent medical documents casts doubts as to the availability of adequate medical supervision of and assistance to the applicant in detention (see Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, § 133, 14 March 2013).
  • EGMR, 23.07.2015 - 12983/14

    PATRANIN v. RUSSIA

    In so doing, the State has frustrated the purpose of the interim measure, which sought to enable the Court, on the basis of a relevant independent medical opinion, to effectively respond to and, if need be, prevent the possible continuous exposure of the applicant to physical and mental suffering in violation of the guarantees of Article 3 of the Convention (see Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, § 222, 14 March 2013.
  • EGMR, 05.02.2015 - 46404/13

    KHLOYEV v. RUSSIA

    In so doing, the State has frustrated the purpose of the interim measure, which sought to enable the Court, on the basis of a relevant independent medical opinion, to effectively respond to and, if need be, prevent the possible continuous exposure of the applicant to physical and mental suffering in violation of the guarantees of Article 3 of the Convention (see Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, § 222, 14 March 2013.
  • EGMR, 17.05.2018 - 1167/15

    ZABELOS AND OTHERS v. GREECE

    The burden of proof is then shifted to the Government to provide explanations and supporting documents (see Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, § 132, 14 March 2013).
  • EGMR, 24.03.2016 - 56660/12

    KORNEYKOVA AND KORNEYKOV v. UKRAINE

    The Court has also held on many occasions that handcuffing or shackling of an ill or otherwise weak person is disproportionate to the requirements of security and implies an unjustifiable humiliation, whether or not intentional (see, for example, Okhrimenko v. Ukraine, no. 53896/07, § 98, 15 October 2009, and Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, §§ 155 and 156, 14 March 2013).
  • EGMR, 11.02.2016 - 15509/12

    KARPYLENKO v. UKRAINE

    Whether or not the authorities" efforts could in principle have averted it is not decisive when examining the discharge by the State of its positive obligation to protect the applicant's son's health and life (see Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, § 180, 14 March 2013).
  • EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 54436/14

    KLIMOV v. RUSSIA

    In so doing, the State has frustrated the purpose of the interim measure, which sought to enable the Court, on the basis of relevant, independent medical opinion, to effectively respond to and, if need be, prevent the possible continued exposure of the applicant to physical and mental suffering in violation of the guarantees of Article 3 of the Convention (see Khloyev v. Russia, no. 46404/13, § 67, 5 February 2015, and Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, no. 28005/08, § 222, 14 March 2013.
  • EGMR, 24.03.2016 - 48475/09

    SAKIR c. GRÈCE

  • EGMR, 23.02.2017 - 37240/07

    KIYASHKO v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 01.03.2016 - 66252/14

    ANDREY LAVROV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 20378/13

    MARTZAKLIS ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE

  • EGMR, 13.10.2016 - 31928/15

    KONOVALCHUK v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 12646/15

    MAYLENSKIY v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 20.09.2016 - 12987/15

    KONDRULIN v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 22.10.2015 - 9414/13

    SOKIL v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 22.10.2015 - 5212/13

    SAVINOV v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 17.10.2017 - 1647/16

    KHUSEYNOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 06.10.2016 - 29070/15

    PIVOVARNIK v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 22.10.2015 - 4725/13

    LUNEV v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 06.10.2015 - 17081/06

    METIN GÜLTEKIN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 43174/08

    MTCHEDLISHVILI v. GEORGIA

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht