Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PIRGURBAN v. AZERBAIJAN

  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  PIRGURBAN v. AZERBAIJAN

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

  Neumeister ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  The Court reiterates that the period to be taken into consideration in determining the length of criminal proceedings begins with the day on which a person is "charged", within the autonomous and substantive meaning to be given to that term (see, among other authorities, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, §§ 42-46, Series A no. 35, and Corigliano v. Italy, 10 December 1982, § 34, Series A no. 57), such as the date of a person's arrest, the date when the person concerned was officially notified that he would be prosecuted, or the date when preliminary investigations were opened (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 19, Series A no. 7; Neumeister v. Austria, 27 June 1968, § 18, Series A no. 8; and Ringeisen v. Austria, 16 July 1971, § 110, Series A no. 13).
• EGMR, 16.07.1971 - 2614/65

  RINGEISEN v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  The Court reiterates that the period to be taken into consideration in determining the length of criminal proceedings begins with the day on which a person is "charged", within the autonomous and substantive meaning to be given to that term (see, among other authorities, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, §§ 42-46, Series A no. 35, and Corigliano v. Italy, 10 December 1982, § 34, Series A no. 57), such as the date of a person's arrest, the date when the person concerned was officially notified that he would be prosecuted, or the date when preliminary investigations were opened (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 19, Series A no. 7; Neumeister v. Austria, 27 June 1968, § 18, Series A no. 8; and Ringeisen v. Austria, 16 July 1971, § 110, Series A no. 13).
• EGMR, 10.12.1982 - 8304/78

  CORIGLIANO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  The Court reiterates that the period to be taken into consideration in determining the length of criminal proceedings begins with the day on which a person is "charged", within the autonomous and substantive meaning to be given to that term (see, among other authorities, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, §§ 42-46, Series A no. 35, and Corigliano v. Italy, 10 December 1982, § 34, Series A no. 57), such as the date of a person's arrest, the date when the person concerned was officially notified that he would be prosecuted, or the date when preliminary investigations were opened (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 19, Series A no. 7; Neumeister v. Austria, 27 June 1968, § 18, Series A no. 8; and Ringeisen v. Austria, 16 July 1971, § 110, Series A no. 13).

 
• EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

  PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  The reasonableness of the length of proceedings is to be assessed in the light of the particular circumstances of the case, regard being had to the criteria laid down in the Court's case-law, in particular the complexity of the case, the applicant's conduct and the conduct of the competent authorities, and what was at stake for the applicant (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II, and Hajibeyli v. Azerbaijan, no. 16528/05, § 50, 10 July 2008).
• EGMR, 27.02.1980 - 6903/75

  DEWEER c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  The Court reiterates that the period to be taken into consideration in determining the length of criminal proceedings begins with the day on which a person is "charged", within the autonomous and substantive meaning to be given to that term (see, among other authorities, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, §§ 42-46, Series A no. 35, and Corigliano v. Italy, 10 December 1982, § 34, Series A no. 57), such as the date of a person's arrest, the date when the person concerned was officially notified that he would be prosecuted, or the date when preliminary investigations were opened (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 19, Series A no. 7; Neumeister v. Austria, 27 June 1968, § 18, Series A no. 8; and Ringeisen v. Austria, 16 July 1971, § 110, Series A no. 13).
• EGMR, 10.07.2008 - 16528/05

  HAJIBEYLI v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  The reasonableness of the length of proceedings is to be assessed in the light of the particular circumstances of the case, regard being had to the criteria laid down in the Court's case-law, in particular the complexity of the case, the applicant's conduct and the conduct of the competent authorities, and what was at stake for the applicant (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II, and Hajibeyli v. Azerbaijan, no. 16528/05, § 50, 10 July 2008).
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64

  Wemhoff ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  The Court reiterates that the period to be taken into consideration in determining the length of criminal proceedings begins with the day on which a person is "charged", within the autonomous and substantive meaning to be given to that term (see, among other authorities, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, §§ 42-46, Series A no. 35, and Corigliano v. Italy, 10 December 1982, § 34, Series A no. 57), such as the date of a person's arrest, the date when the person concerned was officially notified that he would be prosecuted, or the date when preliminary investigations were opened (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 19, Series A no. 7; Neumeister v. Austria, 27 June 1968, § 18, Series A no. 8; and Ringeisen v. Austria, 16 July 1971, § 110, Series A no. 13).
• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  It has held that detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period in the absence of judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among other authorities, Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-57, ECHR 2000-III; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-63, ECHR 2000-IX; and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 33-36, 8 July 2008).
• EGMR, 15.07.2002 - 47095/99

  Russland, Haftbedingungen, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  The period ends with the day on which a charge is finally determined or proceedings are discontinued (see Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 124, ECHR 2002-VI).
• EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 18145/05

  GIGOLASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  It has held that detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period in the absence of judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among other authorities, Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-57, ECHR 2000-III; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-63, ECHR 2000-IX; and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 33-36, 8 July 2008).