Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M.P. AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  Art. 2, Art. 6, Art. 8, Art. 35 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  M.P. AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 18139/91

  TOLSTOY MILOSLAVSKY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 39974/10

  The Court's role is to review under the Convention the decisions that those authorities have taken in the exercise of their power of appreciation (see, mutatis mutandis, Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, 13 July 1995, § 59, Series A no. 316-B).
• EGMR, 06.09.1978 - 5029/71

  Klass u.a. ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 39974/10

  Though the Court is not bound by the findings of domestic courts, in normal circumstances it requires cogent elements to lead it to depart from the findings of fact reached by those courts (see among many other authorities, Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, § 30, Series A no. 28).
• EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 31322/07

  HAAS c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 39974/10

  In the case of Haas v. Switzerland (no. 31322/07, § 51, ECHR 2011), the Court further developed this case-law by acknowledging that an individual's right to decide how and when his or her life should end, provided that he or she was in a position freely to form his or her own will and to act accordingly, was one of the aspects of the right to respect for private life within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention.

 
• EGMR, 26.05.2011 - 27617/04

  R.R. ./. Polen

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 39974/10

  Thus, an applicant will only cease to have standing as a "victim" within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention if the national authorities have acknowledged the alleged violations either expressly or in substance and then afforded redress for the breaches of the Convention, the question whether he/she has received reparation for the damage caused - comparable to just satisfaction as provided for under Article 41 of the Convention - being an important issue (see, inter alia, R.R. v. Poland, no. 27617/04, § 97, ECHR 2011 (extracts), and Kuric and Others v. Slovenia [GC], no. 26828/06, § 259, ECHR 2012 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 08.07.2004 - 53924/00

  Schutz des ungeborenen Lebens durch EMRK - Schwangerschaftsabbruch nach …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 39974/10

  The Government further argued that the foetus was protected against medical negligence through the physician's liability towards its parents, a solution considered as an effective remedy in the Court's judgment of Vo v. France [GC] (no. 53924/00, §§ 91-95, ECHR 2004-VIII); the same approach was adopted by the Bucharest Court of Appeal in its judgment.
• EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02

  Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 39974/10

  As already stated in its case-law, "Article 2 cannot, without a distortion of language, be interpreted as conferring the diametrically opposite right, namely a right to die; nor can it create a right to self-determination in the sense of conferring on an individual the entitlement to choose death rather than life" (Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 39, ECHR 2002-III).