Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  POPKOV v. RUSSIA

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (15)

• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 152 and 153, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 21.12.2000 - 33492/96

  JABLONSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  A person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify the continued detention (see, among other authorities, Castravet v. Moldova, no. 23393/05, §§ 30 and 32, 13 March 2007; McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 41, ECHR 2006-...; Jablonski v. Poland, no. 33492/96, § 83, 21 December 2000; and Neumeister v. Austria, judgment of 27 June 1968, Series A no. 8, § 4).
• EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 38822/97

  Recht auf Freiheit und Sicherheit (zur Wahrnehmung richterlicher Aufgaben …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  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 (extracts)).

 
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 46133/99

  SMIRNOVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  46133/99 and 48183/99, §§ 56 et seq., ECHR 2003-IX (extracts)).
• EGMR, 02.03.2006 - 11886/05

  DOLGOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in Russian cases where the domestic courts extended an applicant's detention relying essentially on the gravity of the charges and using stereotyped formulae without addressing specific facts or considering alternative preventive measures (see Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, §§ 99 et seq., 1 March 2007; Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, §§ 103 et seq., ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, §§ 72 et seq., 1 June 2006; Dolgova v. Russia, no. 11886/05, § §§ 38 et seq., 2 March 2006; Khudoyorov v. Russia, cited above, §§ 172 et seq.; Rokhlina v. Russia, cited above, §§ 63 et seq.; Panchenko v. Russia, cited above, §§ 91 et seq.; and Smirnova v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 01.06.2006 - 7064/05

  MAMEDOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in Russian cases where the domestic courts extended an applicant's detention relying essentially on the gravity of the charges and using stereotyped formulae without addressing specific facts or considering alternative preventive measures (see Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, §§ 99 et seq., 1 March 2007; Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, §§ 103 et seq., ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, §§ 72 et seq., 1 June 2006; Dolgova v. Russia, no. 11886/05, § §§ 38 et seq., 2 March 2006; Khudoyorov v. Russia, cited above, §§ 172 et seq.; Rokhlina v. Russia, cited above, §§ 63 et seq.; Panchenko v. Russia, cited above, §§ 91 et seq.; and Smirnova v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 03.10.2006 - 543/03

  McKAY c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  A person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify the continued detention (see, among other authorities, Castravet v. Moldova, no. 23393/05, §§ 30 and 32, 13 March 2007; McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 41, ECHR 2006-...; Jablonski v. Poland, no. 33492/96, § 83, 21 December 2000; and Neumeister v. Austria, judgment of 27 June 1968, Series A no. 8, § 4).
• EGMR, 26.10.2006 - 59696/00

  KHUDOBIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in Russian cases where the domestic courts extended an applicant's detention relying essentially on the gravity of the charges and using stereotyped formulae without addressing specific facts or considering alternative preventive measures (see Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, §§ 99 et seq., 1 March 2007; Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, §§ 103 et seq., ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, §§ 72 et seq., 1 June 2006; Dolgova v. Russia, no. 11886/05, § §§ 38 et seq., 2 March 2006; Khudoyorov v. Russia, cited above, §§ 172 et seq.; Rokhlina v. Russia, cited above, §§ 63 et seq.; Panchenko v. Russia, cited above, §§ 91 et seq.; and Smirnova v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  BELEVITSKIY v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in Russian cases where the domestic courts extended an applicant's detention relying essentially on the gravity of the charges and using stereotyped formulae without addressing specific facts or considering alternative preventive measures (see Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, §§ 99 et seq., 1 March 2007; Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, §§ 103 et seq., ECHR 2006-... (extracts); Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, §§ 72 et seq., 1 June 2006; Dolgova v. Russia, no. 11886/05, § §§ 38 et seq., 2 March 2006; Khudoyorov v. Russia, cited above, §§ 172 et seq.; Rokhlina v. Russia, cited above, §§ 63 et seq.; Panchenko v. Russia, cited above, §§ 91 et seq.; and Smirnova v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 23393/05

  CASTRAVET v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  A person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify the continued detention (see, among other authorities, Castravet v. Moldova, no. 23393/05, §§ 30 and 32, 13 March 2007; McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 41, ECHR 2006-...; Jablonski v. Poland, no. 33492/96, § 83, 21 December 2000; and Neumeister v. Austria, judgment of 27 June 1968, Series A no. 8, § 4).
• EGMR, 24.11.1994 - 17621/91

  KEMMACHE v. FRANCE (No. 3)
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

  Neumeister ./. Österreich
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 48183/99
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 12.12.1991 - 12718/87

  CLOOTH v. BELGIUM

• EGMR, 14.09.2021 - 13918/06

  SAVENKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  At least one of the NBP members was arrested thereafter and charged with participation in mass disorders, involving the use of gas guns, assault and battery (see Popkov v. Russia, no. 32327/06, § 11, 15 May 2008).

  At least one of the NBP members was arrested thereafter and charged with participation in mass disorder, involving the use of gas guns, assault and battery" (see Popkov v. Russia, no. 32327/06, § 11, 15 May 2008)".