Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BOCHEV v. BULGARIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 8, Art. 13, Art. 17 MRK
  Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 73481/01
• EGMR, 13.11.2008 - 73481/01
• EGMR, 22.11.2017 - 73481/01

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 11.07.2000 - 20869/92

  DIKME c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 73481/01

  The Court is consequently not in a position to make an overall examination of these proceedings and considers that it cannot speculate either on what the Sofia Appellate Court will decide or on what the outcome of an ensuing appeal on points of law might be (see Dikme v. Turkey, no. 20869/92, § 111, ECHR 2000-VIII).
• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 73481/01

  At the hearing of 8 September 2004 the applicant addressed the Sofia City Court in person and relying on Articles 3 and 5 §§ 3, 4 and 5, and 17 of the ECHR and on the judgments Ilijkov v. Bulgaria (no. 33977/96, 26 July 2001) and Jecius v. Lithuania (no. 34578/97, ECHR 2000-IX), complained, inter alia, that his detention had not been ordered by a court, its duration was excessive, the scope of its judicial review was limited and did not include the existence or lack of reasonable suspicion, that the burden of proof in respect of new circumstances was shifted to him, that the conditions of his detention were humiliating and that his mother was ill.
• EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 42095/98

  DAKTARAS c. LITUANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 73481/01

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of a fair trial that is required by paragraph 1 (see Deweer v. Belgium, judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, § 56; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, § 35; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, § 41, ECHR 2000-X; and Butkevicius v. Lithuania, no. 48297/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-II (extracts)).

 
• EGMR, 26.03.2002 - 48297/99

  BUTKEVICIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 73481/01

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of a fair trial that is required by paragraph 1 (see Deweer v. Belgium, judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, § 56; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, § 35; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, § 41, ECHR 2000-X; and Butkevicius v. Lithuania, no. 48297/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-II (extracts)).
• EGMR, 27.11.2003 - 62902/00

  ZOLLMANN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 73481/01

  It is true that he referred once to the arrested person as "the criminal", however, at no point did he mention the applicant's name (contrast, for example, Butkevicius, cited above, §§ 26-30; and Zollmann v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 62902/00, ECHR 2003-XII).
• EGMR, 10.02.1995 - 15175/89

  ALLENET DE RIBEMONT c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 73481/01

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of a fair trial that is required by paragraph 1 (see Deweer v. Belgium, judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, § 56; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, § 35; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, § 41, ECHR 2000-X; and Butkevicius v. Lithuania, no. 48297/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-II (extracts)).
• EGMR, 27.02.1980 - 6903/75

  DEWEER c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.03.2007 - 73481/01

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of a fair trial that is required by paragraph 1 (see Deweer v. Belgium, judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, § 56; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, § 35; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, § 41, ECHR 2000-X; and Butkevicius v. Lithuania, no. 48297/99, § 49, ECHR 2002-II (extracts)).