Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12, 25260/14   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2021,9493
EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12, 25260/14 (https://dejure.org/2021,9493)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 22.04.2021 - 37816/12, 25260/14 (https://dejure.org/2021,9493)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 22. April 2021 - 37816/12, 25260/14 (https://dejure.org/2021,9493)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2021,9493) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    AVAZ ZEYNALOV v. AZERBAIJAN

    Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family ...

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 ... (7)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

  • EGMR, 22.05.2008 - 65755/01

    ILIYA STEFANOV v. BULGARIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12
    The Court reiterates that, according to its case-law, search orders have to be drafted, as far as practicable, in a manner calculated to keep their impact within reasonable bounds (see Iliya Stefanov v. Bulgaria, no. 65755/01, § 41, 22 May 2008, and Kolesnichenko v. Russia, no. 19856/04, § 33, 9 April 2009).
  • EGMR, 28.05.2020 - 29620/07

    FARZALIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

    Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12
    Having regard to the conclusions reached above under Articles 8, 10 and 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (see paragraphs 92, 108 and 128 above) and the parties" submissions, the Court considers that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of these complaints in the present case (compare Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014; Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan (no. 3), no. 35283/14, § 87, 7 May 2020; and Farzaliyev v. Azerbaijan, no. 29620/07, § 73, 28 May 2020).
  • EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08

    CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12
    Having regard to the conclusions reached above under Articles 8, 10 and 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (see paragraphs 92, 108 and 128 above) and the parties" submissions, the Court considers that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of these complaints in the present case (compare Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014; Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan (no. 3), no. 35283/14, § 87, 7 May 2020; and Farzaliyev v. Azerbaijan, no. 29620/07, § 73, 28 May 2020).
  • EGMR, 09.04.2009 - 19856/04

    KOLESNICHENKO v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12
    The Court reiterates that, according to its case-law, search orders have to be drafted, as far as practicable, in a manner calculated to keep their impact within reasonable bounds (see Iliya Stefanov v. Bulgaria, no. 65755/01, § 41, 22 May 2008, and Kolesnichenko v. Russia, no. 19856/04, § 33, 9 April 2009).
  • EGMR, 07.05.2020 - 35283/14

    KHADIJA ISMAYILOVA v. AZERBAIJAN (No. 3)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12
    Having regard to the conclusions reached above under Articles 8, 10 and 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (see paragraphs 92, 108 and 128 above) and the parties" submissions, the Court considers that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the admissibility and merits of these complaints in the present case (compare Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014; Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan (no. 3), no. 35283/14, § 87, 7 May 2020; and Farzaliyev v. Azerbaijan, no. 29620/07, § 73, 28 May 2020).
  • EGMR, 15.10.2013 - 34529/10

    GUTSANOVI c. BULGARIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12
    However, the lack of intention to breach the right to the presumption of innocence cannot rule out a violation of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention and the Court has found on numerous occasions a violation of Article 6 § 2 on account of unqualified declaration of guilt in a pre-trial detention order (see, among many other authorities, Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, no. 34529/10, §§ 201-04, ECHR 2013 (extracts), and Grubnyk, cited above, §§ 138 and 142).
  • EGMR, 28.04.2016 - 41085/05

    BAGIYEVA v. UKRAINE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12
    However, the Court notes that the impugned order was couched in general and broad terms, and allowed searches and seizures at the applicant's home and the premises of the Xural newspaper, without specifying what items or documents were expected to be found and seized (see the terms of the order in paragraph 14 above and compare, among many other cases, Roemen and Schmit v. Luxembourg, no. 51772/99, § 70, ECHR 2003-IV; Ernst and Others, cited above, § 116; and Bagiyeva v. Ukraine, no. 41085/05, § 52, 28 April 2016).
  • EGMR, 28.04.2005 - 41604/98

    Recht auf Achtung des Privatlebens und der Wohnung (Einsatz von Durchsuchungen

    Auszug aus EGMR, 22.04.2021 - 37816/12
    The Court will assess whether the reasons adduced to justify such measures were "relevant" and "sufficient" and whether the aforementioned proportionality principle was adhered to (see Buck v. Germany, no. 41604/98, § 45, ECHR 2005-IV, and Vinks and Ribicka v. Latvia, no. 28926/10, § 102, 30 January 2020).
  • EGMR, 14.10.2021 - 44773/16

    MILACHIKJ v. NORTH MACEDONIA

    As the Court has previously held, where the use of unfortunate language may give rise to concern for respect for the presumption of innocence it is important for it, when examining the context of the proceedings as a whole and its specific features, whether the higher courts expressly engaged with this issue (see Vardan Martirosyan v. Armenia, no. 13610/12, § 84, 15 June 2021 and Avaz Zeynalov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 37816/12 and 25260/14, § 71, 22 April 2021).

    It is the settled case-law of the Court that it will assess whether the higher courts rectified problematic language used by the lower courts such as to eliminate a possible issue under Article 6 § 2. In cases concerning criminal proceedings in which the lower courts, in decisions concerning detention on remand, had used statements indicating that the person had committed the relevant crime, the Court found a violation of Article 6 § 2, concluding that the higher courts either had failed to rectify the "error" made by the lower court (see, for example, Matija?.evic v. Serbia, no. 23037/04, § 47, ECHR 2006-X, and Avaz Zeynalov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 37816/12 and 25260/14, § 71, 22 April 2021) or had failed both to acknowledge such an error and to rectify it (see, for example, Grubnyk v. Ukraine, no. 58444/15, § 146, 17 September 2020, and Vardan Martirosyan v. Armenia, no. 13610/12, § 88, 15 June 2021).

  • EGMR, 15.02.2024 - 35025/20

    KRÁTKY v. SLOVAKIA

    However, the lack of intention to breach the right to the presumption of innocence cannot rule out a violation of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention (see Avaz Zeynalov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 37816/12 and 25260/14, § 69, 22 April 2021).
  • EGMR, 12.09.2023 - 2059/16

    HASANOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

    37816/12 and 25260/14, § 134, 22 April 2021; and Rustamzade v. Azerbaijan (no. 2), no. 22323/16, § 66, 23 February 2023).
  • EGMR - 53205/17 (anhängig)

    ORUJOV v. AZERBAIJAN

    Has there been a violation of the applicant's right to respect for his private and family life, home or correspondence, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, on account of the search measure conducted in his home (see, among many other authorities, Avaz Zeynalov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 37816/12 and 25260/14, §§ 78-92, 22 April 2021)?.
  • EGMR, 01.09.2022 - 1459/14

    SADIGOV v. AZERBAIJAN

    The Court has repeatedly found violations of Article 5 § 3 in previous Azerbaijani cases where similar shortcomings were noted and analysed in detail (see Farhad Aliyev v. Azerbaijan, no. 37138/06, §§ 191-94, 9 November 2010; Muradverdiyev v. Azerbaijan, no. 16966/06, §§ 87-91, 9 December 2010; and Avaz Zeynalov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 37816/12 and 25260/14, §§ 61-62, 22 April 2021).
  • EGMR, 05.09.2023 - 6383/15

    GULIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

    37816/12 and 25260/14, § 122, 22 April 2021).
  • EGMR, 30.08.2022 - 52808/09

    SERGEY SOROKIN v. RUSSIA

    The Court finds, and this is not disputed by the parties, that the search of the applicant's home and the seizure of his electronic devices constituted an interference with the exercise of his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the Convention (see, as a recent authority, Avaz Zeynalov v. Azerbaijan, nos. 37816/12 and 25260/14, § 98, 22 April 2021, with further references).
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