Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2010,64702
EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05 (https://dejure.org/2010,64702)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 21.10.2010 - 11342/05 (https://dejure.org/2010,64702)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 21. Oktober 2010 - 11342/05 (https://dejure.org/2010,64702)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2010,64702) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

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

  • EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

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

    Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05
    Even in the most difficult circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and organised crime, the Convention prohibits in absolute terms torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim's conduct (see, among many other authorities, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 95, ECHR 1999-V).
  • EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

    MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05
    An obligation to investigate "is not an obligation of result, but of means": not every investigation should necessarily be successful or come to a conclusion which coincides with the claimant's account of events; however, it should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III).
  • EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

    LABITA c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05
    Even in the most difficult circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and organised crime, the Convention prohibits in absolute terms torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim's conduct (see, among many other authorities, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 95, ECHR 1999-V).
  • EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

    TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05
    Consideration has been given to delays in the starting of investigations, delays in taking statements (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI, and Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 67, Reports 1998-IV), and the length of time taken to complete an initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001).
  • EGMR, 18.10.2001 - 31143/96

    INDELICATO c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05
    Consideration has been given to delays in the starting of investigations, delays in taking statements (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI, and Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 67, Reports 1998-IV), and the length of time taken to complete an initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001).
  • EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

    PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05
    An obligation to investigate "is not an obligation of result, but of means": not every investigation should necessarily be successful or come to a conclusion which coincides with the claimant's account of events; however, it should in principle be capable of leading to the establishment of the facts of the case and, if the allegations prove to be true, to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 71, ECHR 2002-II, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 124, ECHR 2000-III).
  • EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

    RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 11342/05
    Where an individual is taken into custody in good health but is found to be injured at the time of release, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a plausible and convincing explanation of how those injuries were caused (see Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht