Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 26746/05 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2014,2171) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SHISHKOV v. RUSSIA
Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 34 MRK
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings Article 6-1 - Access to court) No violation of Article 34 - Individual applications ...
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Shishkov v. Russia
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (5) Neu Zitiert selbst (6)
- EGMR, 24.07.2001 - 44558/98
VALASINAS v. LITHUANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 26746/05
The Court does not consider that any established delays in the processing of correspondence in the present case were such as to amount to a breach of the State's obligation under Article 34 of the Convention (see, by way of comparison, Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 134, ECHR 2001-VIII, and Sevastyanov v. Russia, no. 37024/02, §§ 84-87, 22 April 2010). - EGMR, 22.04.2010 - 37024/02
SEVASTYANOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 26746/05
The Court does not consider that any established delays in the processing of correspondence in the present case were such as to amount to a breach of the State's obligation under Article 34 of the Convention (see, by way of comparison, Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 134, ECHR 2001-VIII, and Sevastyanov v. Russia, no. 37024/02, §§ 84-87, 22 April 2010). - EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95
PEERS v. GREECE
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 26746/05
In this connection, the confidentiality of correspondence between the Court and applicants is an important safeguard, since that correspondence may concern allegations against prison authorities or prison staff (see Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 84, ECHR 2001-III).
- EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70
GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 26746/05
The Court reiterates that Article 6 § 1 of the Convention secures to everyone the right to have any claim relating to his or her civil rights and obligations brought before a court or tribunal (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 36, Series A no. 18). - EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 8225/78
ASHINGDANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 26746/05
The right of access to a court is not absolute but may be subject to limitations; these are permitted by implication since the right of access "by its very nature calls for regulation by the State, regulation which may vary in time and in place according to the needs and resources of the community and of individuals" (see Ashingdane v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, § 57, Series A no. 93). - EGMR, 08.03.2006 - 59532/00
BLECIC v. CROATIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.02.2014 - 26746/05
The Court reiterates that it is not open to it to set aside the application of the six-month rule solely because a Government have not made a preliminary objection to that effect (see Blecic v. Croatia [GC], no. 59532/00, § 68, ECHR 2006-III).
- EGMR, 26.01.2017 - 797/14
IVANOVA ET IVASHOVA c. RUSSIE
Au demeurant, la requérante ne prétend pas que les instructions du juge étaient arbitraires, incompréhensibles ou déraisonnables (Shishkov c. Russie, no 26746/05, § 139, 20 février 2014). - EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 36461/05
SHKARUPA v. RUSSIA
The Court considers that his detention in the Berdsk IVS should therefore be regarded as a "continuing situation" (see Shishkov v. Russia, no. 26746/05, § 87, 20 February 2014, and Ananyev and Others, cited above, § 78). - EGMR, 22.09.2015 - 28438/07
ANTIPENKOV v. RUSSIA
Yet in Shishkov, the Court accepted that in 2005 and 2006 the applicant could have reasonably believed that a civil action for damages offered a prospect of success (see Shishkov v. Russia, no. 26746/05, §§ 84-86, 20 February 2014). - EGMR - 20454/12 (anhängig)
BASOV-GRINEV c. RUSSIE
Les dispositions pertinentes relatives au contenu de la demande en justice, son enrôlement et les pièces justificatives exigées sont décrites dans l'arrêt Shishkov c. Russie (no 26746/05, §§ 63-67, 20 février 2014). - EGMR - 56590/09 (anhängig)
BELOGLAZOVA c. RUSSIE
Les autres dispositions pertinentes relatives à l'enrôlement de la demande en justice et à la collecte des preuves sont décrites dans l'arrêt Shishkov c. Russie (no 26746/05, §§ 63 - 67, 20 février 2014).