Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 15.06.2017 - 67608/11 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,19249) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SHALYAVSKI AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect) (englisch)
Sonstiges
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 15.06.2017 - 67608/11
- EGMR, 06.06.2019 - 67608/11
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 34529/10
GUTSANOVI c. BULGARIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2017 - 67608/11
He relied on the Court's findings in the case of Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria (no. 34529/10, § 96, ECHR 2013 (extracts)). - EGMR, 22.05.2001 - 33592/96
BAUMANN v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2017 - 67608/11
The Court refers to its recent finding in the case of Posevini v. Bulgaria (no. 63638/14, §§ 53-55, 19 January 2017) that after 2014 an action under section 1 of that Act could represent an effective remedy in respect of complaints similar to the ones under examination here, in view of the more recent case law of the Supreme Administrative Court; however, the present case concerns facts dating back to 2011, and the availability of an effective domestic remedy has in principle to be assessed by reference to the time when the application had been lodged (see, for example, Baumann v. France, no. 33592/96, § 47, ECHR 2001-V (extracts)). - EGMR, 19.01.2017 - 63638/14
POSEVINI v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2017 - 67608/11
The Court refers to its recent finding in the case of Posevini v. Bulgaria (no. 63638/14, §§ 53-55, 19 January 2017) that after 2014 an action under section 1 of that Act could represent an effective remedy in respect of complaints similar to the ones under examination here, in view of the more recent case law of the Supreme Administrative Court; however, the present case concerns facts dating back to 2011, and the availability of an effective domestic remedy has in principle to be assessed by reference to the time when the application had been lodged (see, for example, Baumann v. France, no. 33592/96, § 47, ECHR 2001-V (extracts)). - EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 30808/11
A, B AND C v. LATVIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2017 - 67608/11
This will be so where the misleading information concerned "the very core of the case" (ibid. § 28; see also Bulea v. Romania, no. 27804/10, § 36, 3 December 2013, and A, B and C v. Latvia, no. 30808/11, § 121, 31 March 2016).