Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ALIEV v. TURKEY

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 13, Art. 13+3 MRK
  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-2 - Information on reasons for arrest) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security ...

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Aliev v. Turkey

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ALIEV v. TURKEY

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (19)

• EGMR, 22.09.2009 - 30471/08

  ABDOLKHANI ET KARIMNIA c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  A description of the relevant domestic law and practice that governed foreigners and asylum seekers at the material time can be found in the case of Abdolkhani and Karimnia v. Turkey (no. 30471/08, §§ 29-45, 22 September 2009).

  The Court has already examined a similar grievance in the case of Abdolkhani and Karimnia v. Turkey (no. 30471/08, §§ 125-135, 22 September 2009), in which it found that in the absence of clear legal provisions in Turkish law establishing the procedure for ordering detention with a view to deportation, the applicants" detention was not "lawful" for the purposes of Article 5 of the Convention.

• EGMR, 10.12.2009 - 43707/07

  KOKTYSH v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  It has previously found violations of Article 3 on account of inadequate conditions of detention, even for short periods of time, notably ten and four days of detention in an overcrowded and dirty cell in the case of Koktysh v. Ukraine (no. 43707/07, §§ 22 and 91-95, 10 December 2009) and five days in Gavrilovici v. Moldova (no. 25464/05, §§ 25 and 42-44, 15 December 2009), and Casuneanu v. Romania (no. 22018/10, § 60-62, 16 April 2013).
• EGMR, 15.12.2009 - 25464/05

  GAVRILOVICI v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  It has previously found violations of Article 3 on account of inadequate conditions of detention, even for short periods of time, notably ten and four days of detention in an overcrowded and dirty cell in the case of Koktysh v. Ukraine (no. 43707/07, §§ 22 and 91-95, 10 December 2009) and five days in Gavrilovici v. Moldova (no. 25464/05, §§ 25 and 42-44, 15 December 2009), and Casuneanu v. Romania (no. 22018/10, § 60-62, 16 April 2013).

 
• EGMR, 13.04.2010 - 46605/07

  CHARAHILI v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  In the absence of sufficient arguments by the Government to refute the applicant's detailed allegations, and bearing in mind the CPT's well-established position regarding the unsuitability of short-term custody cells for longer-term detention (see paragraphs 39-40 above), the foregoing considerations are sufficient to enable the Court to conclude that the conditions of the applicant's nine-day detention in the basement of Fatih police station amounted to degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 (see, mutatis mutandis, Charahili v. Turkey, no. 46605/07, § 77, 13 April 2010).
• EGMR, 27.07.2010 - 50213/08

  ABDOLKHANI AND KARIMNIA v. TURKEY (no. 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  Bearing in mind the dimensions of the cell, this constituted severe overcrowding, which in itself poses a problem under Article 3 of the Convention, even if it lasted for only a day (see Abdolkhani and Karimnia v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 50213/08, § 30, 27 July 2010).
• EGMR, 03.11.2011 - 9390/05

  ALEKSANDRA DMITRIYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  Failure on the part of a Government to submit such information without a satisfactory explanation may give rise to the drawing of inferences as to the well-founded nature of the applicant's allegations, especially when they are backed by reliable evidence (see Aleksandra Dmitriyeva v. Russia, no. 9390/05, § 77, 3 November 2011).
• EGMR, 16.04.2013 - 22018/10

  CASUNEANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  It has previously found violations of Article 3 on account of inadequate conditions of detention, even for short periods of time, notably ten and four days of detention in an overcrowded and dirty cell in the case of Koktysh v. Ukraine (no. 43707/07, §§ 22 and 91-95, 10 December 2009) and five days in Gavrilovici v. Moldova (no. 25464/05, §§ 25 and 42-44, 15 December 2009), and Casuneanu v. Romania (no. 22018/10, § 60-62, 16 April 2013).
• EGMR, 24.06.2014 - 72710/11

  YARASHONEN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  The Court further refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding conditions of detention (see, in particular, Yarashonen v. Turkey, no. 72710/11, §§ 70-73, 24 June 2014, and the cases cited therein).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  The effect of Article 13 is thus to require the provision of a domestic remedy to deal with the substance of an "arguable complaint" under the Convention as in the present case (see above paragraphs 79-88) and to grant appropriate relief (see, among many other authorities, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 157, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2014 - 30518/11

  To assess this evidence, the Court adopts the standard of proof "beyond reasonable doubt", but adds that such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 121, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 24.10.2013 - 72631/10

  NECHEPORENKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 25.01.2000 - 34979/97

  WALKER v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 12.04.2005 - 36378/02

  CHAMAÏEV ET AUTRES c. GEORGIE ET RUSSIE
• EGMR, 08.03.2006 - 59532/00

  BLECIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 13.04.2010 - 32940/08

  TEHRANI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 15916/09

  DBOUBA v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 42525/07

  ANANYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 22426/10

  KESHMIRI v. TURKEY (No. 2)
• EGMR, 12.02.2013 - 58149/08

  AMIE AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

• EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 16483/12

  EGMR zum Umgang mit Flüchtlingen in Lampedusa - Die Würde des Menschen ist …

  Les facteurs aggravants qui ont permis à la Cour de conclure que la gravité du préjudice subi l'emportait sur la brièveté du séjour étaient les suivants: vulnérabilité particulière de l'individu, par exemple dans le cas d'un détenu malade ou malade mental (voir Brega c. Moldova, no 52100/08, §§ 42-43, 20 avril 2010, et Parascineti c. Roumanie, no 32060/05, §§ 53-55, 13 mars 2012) ; conditions exceptionnellement graves, par exemple le fait de devoir passer la nuit dans un espace confiné sans possibilité de s'allonger ou sans accès à des sanitaires (T. et A. c. Turquie, no 47146/11, §§ 95-99, 21 octobre 2014 ; Gavrilovici c. Moldova, no 25464/05, §§ 42-44, 15 décembre 2009 ; Aliev c. Turquie, no 30518/11, § 81, 21 octobre 2014 ; Burzo c. Roumanie, no 75240/01, §§ 99-100, 4 mars 2008) ; enfermement dans une cellule non adaptée à l'hébergement de personnes ou dangereuse (Koktysh c. Ukraine, no 43707/07, §§ 93-95, 10 décembre 2009 ; Casuneanu c. Roumanie, no 22018/10, §§ 61-62, 16 avril 2013 ; Ciupercescu c. Roumanie (no 2), no 64930/09, 24 juillet 2012 ; Tadevosyan c. Arménie, no 41698/04, § 55, 2 décembre 2008 ; Neshkov et autres c. Bulgarie, nos 36925/10, 21487/12, 72893/12, 73196/12, 77718/12 et 9717/13, § 198, 27 janvier 2015).