Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BIK v. RUSSIA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 5-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 61603/00

  Konventionskonforme Auslegung des deutschen (Zivil-)Rechts …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2010 - 26321/03

  In view of the above finding, the Court does not consider it necessary to examine separately the question of whether the applicant had been reliably shown to have been suffering from a mental disorder of a kind or degree warranting his compulsory confinement which persisted during his detention between 14 and 27 June 2002 (see Storck v. Germany, no. 61603/00, § 113, ECHR 2005-V).
• EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73

  WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2010 - 26321/03

  The notion underlying the term in question is one of fair and proper procedure, namely that any measure depriving a person of his liberty should issue from and be executed by an appropriate authority and should not be arbitrary (see Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, 24 October 1979, § 45, Series A no. 33).
• EGMR, 23.02.1984 - 9019/80

  LUBERTI v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2010 - 26321/03

  The Court further reiterates that an individual cannot be deprived of his liberty on the basis of unsoundness of mind unless three minimum conditions are satisfied: he must reliably be shown to be of unsound mind; the mental disorder must be of a kind or degree warranting compulsory confinement; and the validity of continued confinement depends upon the persistence of such a disorder (see Winterwerp, cited above, § 39; Luberti v. Italy, 23 February 1984, § 27, Series A no. 75; Johnson v. the United Kingdom, 24 October 1997, § 60, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VII; and Hutchison Reid v. the United Kingdom, no. 50272/99, § 48, ECHR 2003-IV).

• EGMR, 03.07.2012 - 34806/04

  X v. FINLAND

  A la base du membre de phrase précité se trouve la notion de procédure équitable et adéquate, à savoir l'idée que toute mesure privative de liberté doit émaner d'une autorité qualifiée, être exécutée par une telle autorité et ne pas revêtir un caractère arbitraire (Winterwerp c. Pays-Bas, 24 octobre 1979, § 45, série A no 33, Wassink c. Pays-Bas, 27 septembre 1990, § 24, série A no 185-A, et, plus récemment, Bik c. Russie, no 26321/03, § 30, 22 avril 2010).
• EGMR, 19.03.2019 - 48343/16

  BIGOVIC v. MONTENEGRO

  The Court must moreover ascertain whether domestic law itself is in conformity with the Convention, including the general principles expressed or implied therein (see, for example, X v. Finland, no. 34806/04, § 148, ECHR 2012 (extracts); Bik v. Russia, no. 26321/03, § 30, 22 April 2010; and Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, 24 October 1979, § 45, Series A no. 33).
• EGMR, 05.03.2019 - 31775/16

  SARANOVIC v. MONTENEGRO

  The Court must moreover ascertain whether domestic law itself is in conformity with the Convention, including the general principles expressed or implied therein (see, for example, X v. Finland, no. 34806/04, § 148, ECHR 2012 (extracts); Bik v. Russia, no. 26321/03, § 30, 22 April 2010; and Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, 24 October 1979, § 45, Series A no. 33).
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 76522/12

  MUGOSA v. MONTENEGRO

  The Court must moreover ascertain whether domestic law itself is in conformity with the Convention, including the general principles expressed or implied therein (see, for example, X v. Finland, no. 34806/04, § 148, ECHR 2012 (extracts); Bik v. Russia, no. 26321/03, § 30, 22 April 2010; and Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, 24 October 1979, § 45, Series A no. 33).