Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 74839/10   

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen.

Sie haben noch kein Nutzerkonto? In weniger als einer Minute ist es eingerichtet und Sie können sofort diese und weitere kostenlose Zusatzfunktionen nutzen.

| | Was ist die Merkfunktion?
Ablegen in
Benachrichtigen, wenn:




 
Alle auswählen
 

Zitiervorschläge

https://dejure.org/2013,16453
EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 74839/10 (https://dejure.org/2013,16453)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 16.07.2013 - 74839/10 (https://dejure.org/2013,16453)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 16. Juli 2013 - 74839/10 (https://dejure.org/2013,16453)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2013,16453) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    MUDRIC v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

    Art. 3, Art. 14, Art. 14+3, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
    Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Positive obligations) Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    MUDRIC v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] by the Austrian Institute for Human Rights (ÖIM)

    [DEU] Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Positive obligations) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 14+3 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 14 - Discrimination) (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture;Positive obligations);Non-pecuniary damage - award

  • juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

Sonstiges




Kontextvorschau:





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (9)  

  • EGMR, 02.03.2017 - 41237/14

    Italien muss Opfer von häuslicher Gewalt entschädigen

    (T.M. et C.M. c. République de Moldova, no 26608/11, § 62, 28 janvier 2014 ; Eremia, précité, § 98, et Mudric c. République de Moldova, no 74839/10, § 63, 16 juillet 2013).

    (see Eremia v. the Republic of Moldova (no. 3564/11, § 89, 28 May 2013), Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, § 63, 16 July 2013 and T.M. and C.M. v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 26608/11, § 62, 7 January 2014; my emphasis)".

  • EGMR, 12.04.2016 - 12060/12

    M.C. AND A.C. v. ROMANIA

    The authorities must do whatever is reasonable in the circumstances to collect and secure the evidence, to explore all practical means of discovering the truth, and to deliver fully reasoned, impartial and objective decisions, without omitting suspicious facts that may be indicative of violence induced by, for instance, racial or religious intolerance, or violence motivated by gender-based discrimination (see Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 160, ECHR 2005-VII; Members of the Gldani Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses and Others, §§ 138-42, cited above; and Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, §§ 60-64, 16 July 2013, recently reiterated in Identoba and Others, cited above, § 67).
  • EGMR, 07.10.2014 - 28490/02

    BEGHELURI & OTHERS v. GEORGIA

    The applicants" allegations of discrimination, hence, appear to be even more valid when evaluated within the relevant domestic context of documented and repeated failure by the Georgian authorities to remedy instances of violence directed against Jehovah's Witnesses (see and compare Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, §§ 62-64, 16 July 2013; Eremia v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 3564/11, §§ 89-90, 28 May 2013).
  • EGMR, 28.01.2014 - 26608/11

    T.M. AND C.M. v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

    In respect of the first obligation, the Court notes its previous finding that the authorities have put in place a legislative framework allowing them to take measures against persons accused of domestic violence (see Eremia, cited above, § 57, Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, § 48, 16 July 2013, and B. v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 61382/09, § 50, 16 July 2013).
  • EGMR, 07.12.2017 - 3564/11

    EREMIA CONTRE LA RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA ET 2 AUTRES AFFAIRES

    74839/10.
  • EGMR, 03.07.2014 - 18114/06

    AMADAYEV v. RUSSIA

    This framework should be backed up by law-enforcement machinery, so that when aware of an imminent risk of ill-treatment to an identified individual, or when ill-treatment has already occurred, it affords protection to the victims and punishes those responsible for the breaches of such provisions (see Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, § 47, 16 July 2013).
  • EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 64401/11

    MEREUTA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

    This framework should be backed up by law-enforcement machinery, so that when aware of an imminent risk of ill-treatment to an identified individual, or when ill-treatment has already occurred, it affords protection to the victims and punishes those responsible for the breaches of such provisions (see Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, § 47, 16 July 2013).
  • EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 47666/13

    Z.B. v. CROATIA

    In particular, it considered that the Moldovan authorities had put in place a legislative framework allowing them to take measures against persons accused of domestic violence by providing for specific offences for acts of violence against members of one's own family (see Eremia, cited above, § 57, and Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, § 48, 16 July 2013).
  • EGMR - 21029/13 (anhängig)

    IACHIMOVSCHI v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA and 5 other applications

    In application no. 21029/13, was the applicant subjected to discrimination based on her sex in the form of family violence, contrary to the requirements of Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 3 and/or 8? If so, the authorities comply with their positive obligation to prevent and prosecute those responsible for such discrimination through violence (see, for instance, Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, §§ 39-55, 16 July 2013, and Eremia v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 3564/11, §§ 80-90, 28 May 2013)?.
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht