Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VELICHKO v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 10.11.1969 - 1602/62

  Stögmüller ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  However, the danger of an accused absconding does not result just because it is possible or easy for him to cross a border: there must be a whole set of circumstances, such as, in particular, a lack of well-established ties in the country, which give reason to suppose that the consequences and hazards of flight will seem to him or her to be a lesser evil than continued imprisonment (see Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9).
• EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

  PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities, and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II).
• EGMR, 20.07.2004 - 47940/99

  BALOGH v. HUNGARY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  The Convention prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances or the victim's behaviour (see Balogh v. Hungary, no. 47940/99, § 44, 20 July 2004, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).

 
• EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 38822/97

  Recht auf Freiheit und Sicherheit (zur Wahrnehmung richterlicher Aufgaben …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  Justification for any period of detention, no matter how short, must be convincingly demonstrated by the authorities (see Shishkov v. Bulgaria, no. 38822/97, § 66, ECHR 2003-I).
• EGMR, 09.03.2006 - 72776/01

  BRATYAKIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  The Convention requires that the authorities respect the binding nature of a final judicial decision and allow the resumption of criminal proceedings only if serious legitimate considerations outweigh the principle of legal certainty (see Bratyakin v. Russia (dec.), no. 72776/01, 14 April 2001).
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  Nor can the continuation of such detention be used to anticipate a custodial sentence (see Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207; Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, § 102, 8 February 2005; Goral v. Poland, no. 38654/97, § 68, 30 October 2003; and Ilijkov v. Bulgaria, no. 33977/96, § 81, 26 July 2001).
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 52854/99

  RIABYKH c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  A departure from that principle is justified only when made necessary by circumstances of a substantial and compelling character, such as correction of fundamental defects or miscarriage of justice (see, among numerous authorities, Ryabykh v. Russia, no. 52854/99, § 52, ECHR 2003-IX).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  The Convention prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances or the victim's behaviour (see Balogh v. Hungary, no. 47940/99, § 44, 20 July 2004, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 20.07.2004 - 50178/99

  NIKITINE c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 19664/07

  In other words, the power to reopen criminal proceedings must be exercised by the authorities so as to strike, to the maximum extent possible, a fair balance between the interests of the individual and the need to ensure the effectiveness of the criminal justice system (see Nikitin v. Russia, no. 50178/99, § 54-61, ECHR 2004-VIII).

• EGMR - 37964/17 (anhängig)

  SHILOV v. RUSSIA and 7 othe applications

  Some of the applicants also complain about delayed review of their appeals against house-arrest or detention orders (see, mutatis mutandis, Butusov v. Russia, no. 7923/04, §§ 29 35, 22 December 2009, Pichugin v. Russia, no. 38623/03, §§ 148-56, 23 October 2012) and violation of legal certainty principle in detention proceedings (see, mutatis mutandis, Velichko v. Russia, no. 19664/07, §§ 61-75, 15 January 2013).