Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 14.04.2015 - 43873/10 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,6834) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
TORAN AND SCHYMIK v. ROMANIA
Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) ...
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
TORAN ET SCHYMIK c. ROUMANIE
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.04.2015 - 43873/10
The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding conditions of detention (see, for instance, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 90-94, ECHR 2000-XI and Artimenco v. Romania, no. 12535/04, §§ 31-33, 30 June 2009). - EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 73557/01
SEQUEIRA contre le PORTUGAL
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.04.2015 - 43873/10
In that respect, the Court finds that the actions of the police to follow up S.R.B."s testimony that other people were involved in drug trafficking by facilitating communication between S.R.B. and the applicants and by providing him with money for the transaction remained, on balance, within the bounds of undercover work, rather than that of agents provocateurs (see also Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI). - EGMR, 10.09.2002 - 40461/98
LEWIS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.04.2015 - 43873/10
Lastly, where the information disclosed by the prosecution authorities does not enable the Court to conclude whether the applicant was subjected to police incitement, it is essential that the Court examine the procedure whereby the plea of incitement was determined in each case in order to ensure that the rights of the defence were adequately protected, in particular the right to adversarial proceedings and to equality of arms (see Edwards and Lewis v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39647/98 and 40461/98, §§ 46-48, ECHR 2004-X). - EGMR, 06.04.2004 - 67537/01
SHANNON c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.04.2015 - 43873/10
Nevertheless, the Court has previously ruled that the applicants" behaviour could be indicative of pre-existing criminal activity (see Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV). - EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 12535/04
ARTIMENCO c. ROUMANIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.04.2015 - 43873/10
The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding conditions of detention (see, for instance, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 90-94, ECHR 2000-XI and Artimenco v. Romania, no. 12535/04, §§ 31-33, 30 June 2009).
- EGMR, 13.10.2015 - 50860/12
ROSCA c. ROUMANIE
La Cour en déduit que les conditions dénoncées par le requérant, en particulier la mauvaise qualité de la nourriture et la présence des parasites alléguées, n'ont pas soumis celui-ci à une épreuve d'une intensité qui excédait le niveau inévitable de souffrance inhérent à la détention (voir, a contrario, Kaja c. Grèce, no 32927/03, § 49, 27 juillet 2006 ; voir également Toran et Schymik c. Roumanie, no 43873/10, § 35, 14 avril 2015).