Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KOLAKOVIC v. MALTA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3 MRK
  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention Reasonableness of pre-trial detention) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  KOLAKOVIC v. MALTA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 14 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.03.2015 - 76392/12

  It falls above all to the national judicial authorities to ensure that, in a given case, the pre-trial detention of an accused person does not exceed a reasonable time (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 152, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 10.03.2009 - 4378/02

  Recht auf ein faires Verfahren (heimliche Ermittlungsmethoden; Umgehungsverbot; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.03.2015 - 76392/12

  According to the Court's case-law, the presumption under Article 5 is in favour of release (see Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 61, 10 March 2009).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.03.2015 - 76392/12

  It falls above all to the national judicial authorities to ensure that, in a given case, the pre-trial detention of an accused person does not exceed a reasonable time (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 152, ECHR 2000-IV).

 
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64

  Wemhoff ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.03.2015 - 76392/12

  Where the only remaining reason for continued detention is the fear that the accused will abscond and thereby subsequently avoid appearing for trial, his release pending trial must be ordered if it is possible to obtain from him guarantees that will ensure his subsequent appearance (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 15, Series A no. 7 and Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 46, Series A no. 207).
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

  Neumeister ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.03.2015 - 76392/12

  The amount of bail must therefore be set by reference to the detainees" assets, and with due regard to the extent to which the prospect of its loss will be a sufficient deterrent to dispel any wish on their part to abscond (see Neumeister v. Austria, 27 June 1968, § 14, Series A no. 8).
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.03.2015 - 76392/12

  Where the only remaining reason for continued detention is the fear that the accused will abscond and thereby subsequently avoid appearing for trial, his release pending trial must be ordered if it is possible to obtain from him guarantees that will ensure his subsequent appearance (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 15, Series A no. 7 and Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 46, Series A no. 207).
• EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 12050/04

  Mangouras ./. Spanien

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.03.2015 - 76392/12

  According to the Court's case-law, the guarantee provided for by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention is designed to ensure the presence of the accused at the hearing (see Mangouras v. Spain [GC], no. 12050/04, § 78, ECHR 2010).
• EGMR, 10.08.2006 - 56308/00

  TOSHEV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.03.2015 - 76392/12

  However, the accused whom the judicial authorities declare themselves prepared to release on bail must in good faith submit sufficient information, that can be verified if necessary, about the amount of bail to be fixed (see Toshev v. Bulgaria, no. 56308/00, § 68, 10 August 2006).

• EGMR, 30.11.2021 - 568/19

  MYSLIWIEC v. POLAND

  As regards the complaint raised under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, the Court reiterates that the conditions imposed on a suspect to ensure his or her appearance at trial - such as the establishment of an appropriate amount of bail - may be, depending on the circumstances of the case, of the utmost importance for assessing the merits of such a complaint (see, for example, Kolakovic v. Malta, no. 76392/12, §§ 68-69, 19 March 2015, and Gafà v. Malta, no. 54335/14, §§ 70-71, 22 May 2018).