Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AVANESYAN v. RUSSIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 13+8 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 13+8-1 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life Article 8-1 - Respect for home) Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Avanesyan v. Russia

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 19.09.2002 - 62002/00

  TAMOSIUS contre le ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2014 - 41152/06

  In that case the notion of an effective remedy does not necessarily presuppose the possibility of challenging the issuing of the warrant prior to conducting the search (see Iliya Stefanov v. Bulgaria, no. 65755/01, § 59, 22 May 2008, and Tamosius v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 62002/00, ECHR 2002-VIII).
• EGMR, 28.04.2005 - 41604/98

  Recht auf Achtung des Privatlebens und der Wohnung (Einsatz von Durchsuchungen …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2014 - 41152/06

  As regards the proportionality requirement, the criteria the Court has taken into consideration in determining whether it was met include, but are not limited to, the severity of the offence in connection with which the search was effected, the manner and circumstances in which the order was issued, in particular whether the warrant was based on a reasonable suspicion, and the content and scope of the order, having particular regard to the nature of the premises searched and the safeguards taken in order to confine the impact of the measure to reasonable bounds (see Iliya Stefanov, cited above, § 38, and Buck v. Germany, no. 41604/98, §§ 44-45, ECHR 2005-IV).
• EGMR, 22.05.2008 - 65755/01

  ILIYA STEFANOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2014 - 41152/06

  In that case the notion of an effective remedy does not necessarily presuppose the possibility of challenging the issuing of the warrant prior to conducting the search (see Iliya Stefanov v. Bulgaria, no. 65755/01, § 59, 22 May 2008, and Tamosius v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 62002/00, ECHR 2002-VIII).

• EGMR, 07.11.2017 - 29431/05

  ZUBKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Indeed, the OSAA does not provide for the possibility of lodging an appeal against such a decision, even after the individual concerned has come to know of its existence (see Avanesyan v. Russia, no. 41152/06, § 30, 18 September 2014).
• EGMR, 16.02.2021 - 69762/12

  BUDAK v. TURKEY

  On the contrary, his complaint was that the search had lacked a legal basis and had thus been unlawful owing to the absence of two attesting witnesses, whose presence was a statutory requirement under Article 119 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (see Avanesyan v. Russia, no. 41152/06, § 31, 18 September 2014, and compare Xavier Da Silveira v. France, no. 43757/05, § 46, 21 January 2010).
• EGMR, 28.04.2016 - 41085/05

  BAGIYEVA v. UKRAINE

  The fact that the search warrant was issued in the absence of the applicant is not problematic in itself, since a domestic court may have good reasons to issue a search warrant at an ex parte hearing (see Tamosius v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 62002/00, ECHR 2002-VIII, and Avanesyan v. Russia, no. 41152/06, § 29, 18 September 2014).
• EGMR, 22.02.2022 - 74320/10

  CHEPRUNOVY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court also finds that the terms of the search warrants were excessively broad and that they gave the police unrestricted discretion in determining which items were relevant for the investigation (see Avanesyan v. Russia, no. 41152/06, § 43, 18 September 2014, with further references).