Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M.S.-D. AND I.D. v. POLAND

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 8, Art. 35, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1 MRK
  Partly struck out of the list Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  M.S.-D. AND I.D. v. POLAND

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 26.06.2001 - 37453/97

  AKMAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 32420/07

  The Government take notice of criteria emerging from the Court's case-law as to when it is appropriate to decide to strike out the application with reference to Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of the unilateral declaration made by the Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continue (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC] (preliminary objection), no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; and also Haran v. Turkey, no. 25754/94, judgment of 26 March 2002, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI, Meriakri v. Moldova (striking out), no. 53487/99, 1 March 2005, Aleksentseva and 28 Others v. Russia (restoring), no. 75025/01, 26 March 2006, Van Houten v. the Netherlands (striking out), no. 25149/03, 29 September 2005, Denu v. the Netherlands, no. 32321/03 (striking out), 4 May 2006).
• EGMR, 26.03.2002 - 25754/94

  HARAN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 32420/07

  The Government take notice of criteria emerging from the Court's case-law as to when it is appropriate to decide to strike out the application with reference to Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of the unilateral declaration made by the Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continue (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC] (preliminary objection), no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; and also Haran v. Turkey, no. 25754/94, judgment of 26 March 2002, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI, Meriakri v. Moldova (striking out), no. 53487/99, 1 March 2005, Aleksentseva and 28 Others v. Russia (restoring), no. 75025/01, 26 March 2006, Van Houten v. the Netherlands (striking out), no. 25149/03, 29 September 2005, Denu v. the Netherlands, no. 32321/03 (striking out), 4 May 2006).
• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 53487/99

  MERIAKRI v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 32420/07

  The Government take notice of criteria emerging from the Court's case-law as to when it is appropriate to decide to strike out the application with reference to Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of the unilateral declaration made by the Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continue (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC] (preliminary objection), no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; and also Haran v. Turkey, no. 25754/94, judgment of 26 March 2002, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI, Meriakri v. Moldova (striking out), no. 53487/99, 1 March 2005, Aleksentseva and 28 Others v. Russia (restoring), no. 75025/01, 26 March 2006, Van Houten v. the Netherlands (striking out), no. 25149/03, 29 September 2005, Denu v. the Netherlands, no. 32321/03 (striking out), 4 May 2006).

 
• EGMR, 29.09.2005 - 25149/03

  Rechtssache V. H. gegen die NIEDERLANDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 32420/07

  The Government take notice of criteria emerging from the Court's case-law as to when it is appropriate to decide to strike out the application with reference to Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of the unilateral declaration made by the Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continue (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC] (preliminary objection), no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; and also Haran v. Turkey, no. 25754/94, judgment of 26 March 2002, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI, Meriakri v. Moldova (striking out), no. 53487/99, 1 March 2005, Aleksentseva and 28 Others v. Russia (restoring), no. 75025/01, 26 March 2006, Van Houten v. the Netherlands (striking out), no. 25149/03, 29 September 2005, Denu v. the Netherlands, no. 32321/03 (striking out), 4 May 2006).
• EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 32321/03

  DENU v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 32420/07

  The Government take notice of criteria emerging from the Court's case-law as to when it is appropriate to decide to strike out the application with reference to Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of the unilateral declaration made by the Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continue (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC] (preliminary objection), no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; and also Haran v. Turkey, no. 25754/94, judgment of 26 March 2002, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI, Meriakri v. Moldova (striking out), no. 53487/99, 1 March 2005, Aleksentseva and 28 Others v. Russia (restoring), no. 75025/01, 26 March 2006, Van Houten v. the Netherlands (striking out), no. 25149/03, 29 September 2005, Denu v. the Netherlands, no. 32321/03 (striking out), 4 May 2006).
• EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73

  WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 32420/07

  Also the Government give recognition to the violation of Article 5§ 1 (c) concerning the fact of first applicant's detention in connection with its factual necessity for the proper conduct of investigation and violation of Article 5 § 4 regarding to insufficiency in providing a prompt access to judicial proceedings to determine the legality of first applicant's detention (see Winterwerp v. the Netherlands judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, pp. 19-20, § 45; Baranowski v. Poland, judgment of 28 March 2000 no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52 and 68-70).