Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  EREMIASOVA AND PECHOVA v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 2 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 2 (procedural aspect) Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Eremiásová and Pechová v. the Czech Republic

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04
• EGMR, 20.06.2013 - 23944/04
• EGMR, 28.05.2014 - 23944/04

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (21)

• EGMR, 14.12.2010 - 74832/01

  MIZIGÁROVÁ v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  The burden of proof is on the Government claiming non-exhaustion to satisfy the Court that an effective remedy was available in theory and practice at the relevant time, namely, that the remedy was accessible, capable of providing redress in respect of the applicant's complaints and offered reasonable prospects of success (Mizigárová v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 74832/01, 3 November 2009; T. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24724/94, § 55, 16 December 1999).

  The authorities" obligation to account for an individual in custody is particularly stringent where that individual dies (Mizigárová v. Slovakia, no. 74832/01, § 84, 14 December 2010).

• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  Having regard to the fundamental importance of the right to life, the Court must subject any possible interferences with Article 2 of the Convention to the most careful and thorough scrutiny, taking into account not only the actions of State agents but also all the surrounding circumstances (McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, § 150, Series A no. 324).
• EGMR, 08.07.2004 - 53924/00

  Schutz des ungeborenen Lebens durch EMRK - Schwangerschaftsabbruch nach …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  In the past, the Court has accepted that civil redress may be a sufficient remedy only in the specific sphere of medical negligence (Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, §§ 51-55, ECHR 2002-I;, Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V; Vo v. France [GC], no. 53924/00, §§ 90-94, ECHR 2004-VIII; G.N. and Others v. Italy, no. 43134/05, § 82, 1 December 2009).

 
• EGMR, 20.12.2004 - 50385/99

  MAKARATZIS c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  The Court also reiterates that since often, in practice, the true circumstances of a death in cases like the instant one are largely confined within the knowledge of State officials or authorities, the bringing of appropriate domestic proceedings, such as a criminal prosecution, disciplinary proceedings and proceedings for the exercise of remedies available to victims and their families, will be conditioned by an adequate official investigation, which must be independent and impartial (mutatis mutandis Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, § 73, ECHR 2004-XI).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  The applicants asserted that where an individual is taken into custody in good health but later dies, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation of the events leading to his death (Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 110, ECHR 2002-IV, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 03.04.2001 - 27229/95

  KEENAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  It may also imply in certain well-defined circumstances a positive obligation on the authorities to take preventive operational measures to protect an individual whose life is at risk from the criminal acts of another individual or even where such a risk derives from self-harm (Mizigárová v. Slovakia, cited above, § 89; Keenan v. the United Kingdom, no. 27229/95, § 90 et seq., ECHR 2001-III; Osman v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 115).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  Indeed, in such cases strong presumptions of fact arise in respect of the suspect death against the State authorities and the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation, beyond reasonable doubt (Velikova v. Bulgaria, no. 41488/98, § 70, ECHR 2000-VI; Kelly and Others v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 92; Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; Orhan v. Turkey, no. 25656/94, § 327, 18 June 2002).
• EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96

  CALVELLI ET CIGLIO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  In the past, the Court has accepted that civil redress may be a sufficient remedy only in the specific sphere of medical negligence (Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, §§ 51-55, ECHR 2002-I;, Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V; Vo v. France [GC], no. 53924/00, §§ 90-94, ECHR 2004-VIII; G.N. and Others v. Italy, no. 43134/05, § 82, 1 December 2009).
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  A positive obligation will arise, the Court has held, where it has been established that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual by a third party or himself and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk (Keenan v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 90; Osman v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 116; Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 55, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97

  ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.02.2012 - 23944/04

  The applicants asserted that where an individual is taken into custody in good health but later dies, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation of the events leading to his death (Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 110, ECHR 2002-IV, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 04.05.2000 - 45305/99

  POWELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 18.06.2002 - 25656/94

  ORHAN v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 34884/97

  BOTTAZZI c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98
• EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 47916/99

  MENSON contre le ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 24.04.2003 - 24351/94

  AKTAS v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 18.12.1996 - 21987/93

  AKSOY c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 22277/93

  ILHAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 16.12.1999 - 24724/94

  Mord an James Bulger
• EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57945/00
• EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57942/00

  KHASHIYEV AND AKAYEVA v. RUSSIA