Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ÖZCAN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 2 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 18893/05

  It follows, therefore, that the Government should bear the burden of providing a plausible explanation for the cause of those injuries (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 21894/93

  AKKUM AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 18893/05

  It follows that the killing lies within the exclusive knowledge of the authorities and the respondent Government are thus under an obligation to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation of how the killing occurred, failing which an issue under Article 2 of the Convention will arise (see Akkum and Others v. Turkey, no. 21894/93, § 211, ECHR 2005-II (extracts); see also Yasin Ates v. Turkey, no. 30949/96, § 95, 31 May 2005).
• EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 30949/96

  YASIN ATES v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 18893/05

  It follows that the killing lies within the exclusive knowledge of the authorities and the respondent Government are thus under an obligation to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation of how the killing occurred, failing which an issue under Article 2 of the Convention will arise (see Akkum and Others v. Turkey, no. 21894/93, § 211, ECHR 2005-II (extracts); see also Yasin Ates v. Turkey, no. 30949/96, § 95, 31 May 2005).

 
• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 18893/05

  In particular, the force used must be strictly proportionate to the achievement of the aims set out in the subparagraphs of the Article (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, §§ 148-149, Series A no. 324).
• EGMR, 13.06.1994 - 10588/83

  BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN (ARTICLE 50)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 18893/05

  The Court's case-law has established that there must be a clear causal connection between the damages claimed by the applicant and the violation of the Convention and that this may, in appropriate cases, include compensation in respect of loss of earnings (see, among other authorities, Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain (Article 50), 13 June 1994, §§ 16-20, Series A no. 285-C).
• EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89

  KLAAS c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 18893/05

  Though the Court is not bound by the findings of domestic authorities, in normal circumstances it requires cogent elements to lead it to depart from the findings of fact reached by those authorities (see, mutatis mutandis, Klaas v. Germany, 22 September 1993, §§ 29-30, Series A no. 269).

• EGMR, 02.07.2013 - 44125/06

  GÜLBAHAR ÖZER AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  The Court considers that allowing a unit of soldiers to take such an active part in the investigation into the killing of five persons by another unit of soldiers is not only so serious as to taint the independence of the entirety of the criminal proceedings (see Ramsahai and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 52391/99, §§ 339-341, ECHR 2007-II), but also entailed the risk that crucial evidence implicating the soldiers in the killing would be destroyed or ignored (see Özcan and Others v. Turkey, no. 18893/05, § 66, 20 April 2010).
• EGMR, 26.02.2019 - 51181/10

  GÜZÜPEK v. TURKEY

  To that end the Court reiterates that, in cases concerning deprivations of life, Contracting States have a procedural obligation under Article 2 of the Convention to conduct an effective investigation capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see, inter alia, Özcan and Others v. Turkey, no. 18893/05, § 54, 20 April 2010 and the cases cited therein).
• EGMR, 10.02.2022 - 73975/16

  A AND B v. GEORGIA

  The Court thus considers it appropriate to join this matter to the merits of the complaint made by the applicants under the procedural limb of Article 2 of the Convention, read together with Article 14 (compare, for instance, Petrovic v. Serbia, no. 40485/08, §§ 64 and 65, 15 July 2014, and Özcan and Others v. Turkey, no. 18893/05, § 55, 20 April 2010).
• EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 34461/07

  YAVUZ ÇELIK v. TURKEY

  This investigation, as with that under Article 2, should be capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see, mutatis mutandis, Assenov and Others v. Bulgaria, 28 October 1998, § 102, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII; Beker v. Turkey, no. 27866/03, § 53, 24 March 2009; and Özcan and Others v. Turkey, no. 18893/05, § 73, 20 April 2010).