Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KARAYIGIT v. TURKEY

  Art. 3, Art. 13, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 3 Violation of Art. 13 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - domestic and Convention proceedings ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 05.11.2002 - 63181/00
• EGMR, 05.10.2004 - 63181/00
• EGMR, 20.09.2005 - 63181/00

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

• EGMR, 29.04.2003 - 50390/99

  McGLINCHEY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.09.2005 - 63181/00

  The authorities were therefore under an obligation to conduct an effective investigation fulfilling the requirements of this provision (see McGlinchey and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 50390/99, § 64, ECHR 2003-V, and Batı and Others, cited above, §§ 133-138).
• EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87

  TOMASI c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.09.2005 - 63181/00

  The Court reiterates that where an individual is taken into custody in good health but is found to be injured at the time of release, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation of how those injuries were caused and to produce evidence casting doubt on the victim's allegations, particularly if those allegations were corroborated by medical reports, failing which a clear issue arises under Article 3 of the Convention (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V, Aksoy v. Turkey, judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI, p. 2278, § 62, Tomasi v. France, judgment of 27 August 1992, Series A no. 241-A, pp. 40-41, §§ 108-111, and Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, p. 26, § 34).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.09.2005 - 63181/00

  The Court reiterates that where an individual is taken into custody in good health but is found to be injured at the time of release, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation of how those injuries were caused and to produce evidence casting doubt on the victim's allegations, particularly if those allegations were corroborated by medical reports, failing which a clear issue arises under Article 3 of the Convention (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V, Aksoy v. Turkey, judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI, p. 2278, § 62, Tomasi v. France, judgment of 27 August 1992, Series A no. 241-A, pp. 40-41, §§ 108-111, and Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, p. 26, § 34).

• EGMR, 26.01.2010 - 43529/04

  ATLI c. TURQUIE

  S'agissant du non-épuisement des voies de recours internes, la Cour rappelle avoir déjà maintes fois rejeté une telle exception (Yerdelenli c. Turquie, no 41253/04, § 17, 7 juillet 2009, et KarayiÄŸit c. Turquie (déc.), no 63181/00, 5 octobre 2004).
• EGMR, 09.02.2010 - 26235/04

  CEMALETTIN CANLI c. TURQUIE (N° 2)

  En ce qui concerne le non-épuisement des voies de recours internes, la Cour rappelle qu'elle a déjà maintes fois rejeté une telle exception (Yerdelenli c. Turquie, no 41253/04, § 17, 7 juillet 2009, et KarayiÄŸit c. Turquie (déc.), no 63181/00, 5 octobre 2004).
• EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 16234/04

  FÜSUN ERDOGAN ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  S'agissant de l'absence d'une action en vue d'obtenir des dommages et intérêts, la Cour rappelle qu'elle a déjà eu maintes fois par le passé l'occasion de se prononcer sur ce point et de rejeter cette exception (voir, parmi d'autres, KarayiÄŸit c. Turquie (déc.), no 63181/00, 5 octobre 2004).