Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 22.11.2011 - 35254/07   

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen.

Sie haben noch kein Nutzerkonto? In weniger als einer Minute ist es eingerichtet und Sie können sofort diese und weitere kostenlose Zusatzfunktionen nutzen.

| | Was ist die Merkfunktion?
Ablegen in
Benachrichtigen, wenn:




 
Alle auswählen
 

Zitiervorschläge

https://dejure.org/2011,55885
EGMR, 22.11.2011 - 35254/07 (https://dejure.org/2011,55885)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 22.11.2011 - 35254/07 (https://dejure.org/2011,55885)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 22. November 2011 - 35254/07 (https://dejure.org/2011,55885)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,55885) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

Sonstiges (2)

 
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 ... (31)

  • EGMR, 21.12.2017 - 55506/08

    MESKHIDZE v. GEORGIA

    The relevant legal provisions concerning the protection of prisoners" rights in the custodial institutions of Georgia at the material time are set out in the following judgments: Goginashvili v. Georgia (no. 47729/08, §§ 32-35, 4 October 2011), and Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia (no. 35254/07, §§ 40-43, 22 November 2011).

    Having regard to the Court's relevant case-law (see Goginashvili v. Georgia, no. 47729/08, §§ 51-60, 4 October 2011; see also Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, §§ 54-55, 22 November 2011), the Court dismisses the Government's non-exhaustion plea.

  • EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 24109/07

    ASIYE GENÇ c. TURQUIE

    Notamment, lorsqu'il y a des raisons plausibles de croire que le décès est suspect, l'article 2 exige que les autorités déclenchent promptement et de leur propre chef une enquête officielle, indépendante, impartiale et efficace afin de vérifier les circonstances qui en sont à l'origine (voir, mutatis mutandis, Tararieva c. Russie, no 4353/03, §§ 74, 75 et 103, CEDH 2006-XV (extraits), Kats et autres c. Ukraine, no 29971/04, §§ 116 et 120, 18 décembre 2008, Gagiu c. Roumanie, no 63258/00, § 68, 24 février 2009, Makharadze et Sikharulidze c. Géorgie, no 35254/07, § 87, 22 novembre 2011, et Gülay Çetin c. Turquie, no 44084/10, § 87, 5 mars 2013).
  • EGMR, 23.07.2013 - 4458/10

    MIKALAUSKAS v. MALTA

    Further, in the context of complaints that there was a lack of adequate care for prisoners suffering from serious illnesses the Court has held that a preventive remedy ought to have the potential to bring direct and timely relief (see Goginashvili v. Georgia, no.47729/08, § 49, 4 October 2011, Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no.35254/07, § 52, 22 November 2011 and Cuprakovs v. Latvia, no. 8543/04, § 50, 18 December 2012).
  • EGMR, 05.03.2013 - 44084/10

    GÜLAY ÇETIN c. TURQUIE

    On peut citer à titre d'exemple les principes relatifs à l'obligation faite aux Etats de protéger la vie et la santé des personnes privées de leur liberté (voir, entre autres, Powell c. Royaume-Uni (déc.), no 45305/99, CEDH 2000-V, Makharadze et Sikharulidze c. Géorgie, no 35254/07, §§ 71 et 73, 22 novembre 2011, Naoumenko c. Ukraine, no 42023/98, § 112, 10 février 2004, Dzieciak c. Pologne, no 77766/01, § 91, 9 décembre 2008, Huylu c. Turquie, no 52955/99, §§ 57-58, 16 novembre 2006, Taïs c. France, no 39922/03, §§ 96 et 98, 1er juin 2006, Anguelova c. Bulgarie, no 38361/97, § 130, CEDH 2002-IV, ou encore Tararieva c. Russie, no 4353/03, §§ 74, 85 et 87, CEDH 2006-XV (extraits)), obligation qui impose d'instaurer un système judiciaire efficace et indépendant qui permette d'établir la cause du décès des individus se trouvant sous la responsabilité de professionnels pénitentiaires de la santé - c'est-à-dire de soumettre les faits de la cause à un contrôle public - et, le cas échéant, d'obliger ces professionnels à répondre de leurs actes (voir, par exemple, Powell, précitée, et, mutatis mutandis, Dodov c. Bulgarie, no 59548/00, § 80, 17 janvier 2008, Vo c. France [GC], no 53924/00, § 89, CEDH 2004-VIII, et Calvelli et Ciglio, précité, § 49, avec les références qui y figurent).
  • EGMR, 28.02.2012 - 30779/05

    MELNITIS v. LATVIA

    In contrast to the cases concerning the length of judicial proceedings or non-enforcement of judgments, where the Court has accepted in principle that a compensatory remedy alone might suffice (see Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, § 17, ECHR 2002-VIII; Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 187, ECHR 2006-V; and Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 99, ECHR 2009 (extracts)), the existence of a preventive remedy is indispensable for the effective protection of individuals against the kind of treatment prohibited by Article 3 (see also Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, §§ 54-55, 22 November 2011).
  • EGMR, 24.05.2016 - 52526/07

    MAKSHAKOV v. RUSSIA

    The Court has already condemned delays in recommending and performing such a test in the initial stages of the diagnostic process (see Kushnir v. Ukraine, no. 42184/09, § 146, 11 December 2014; Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, § 90, 22 November 2011; and Gladkiy, cited above, § 93).
  • EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 1871/08

    JELADZE v. GEORGIA

    Rather, the compatibility of a detainee's state of health with his or her continued detention, even if he or she is seriously ill, is contingent on the State's ability to provide relevant treatment of the requisite quality in prison (see Goginashvili v. Georgia, no. 47729/08, §§ 69-70, 4 October 2011, and Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, §§ 71-73, 22 November 2011, with further references).
  • EGMR, 11.02.2016 - 15509/12

    KARPYLENKO v. UKRAINE

    That is the case, for instance, where a person dies in custody in suspicious circumstances (even where the apparent cause of death is a medical condition), which, as a rule, raises the question of whether the State has complied with its positive obligation to protect that person's right to life (see Slimani v. France, no. 57671/00, §§ 30 and 34, ECHR 2004-IX (extracts); Kats and Others, cited above, § 115; Geppa v. Russia, no. 8532/06, § 71, 3 February 2011; and Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, § 87, 22 November 2011).
  • EGMR, 24.11.2016 - 11275/07

    MURADYAN v. ARMENIA

    Having regard to the findings relating to Article 2 of the Convention (see paragraphs 153-156 above), the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine whether, in this case, there have also been violations of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, § 94, 22 November 2011; Gülbahar Özer and Others v. Turkey, no. 44125/06, § 78, 2 July 2013; and Fanziyeva v. Russia, no. 41675/08, § 85, 18 June 2015).
  • EGMR, 06.10.2016 - 24710/06

    YAROVENKO v. UKRAINE

    In assessing the adequacy of medical treatment of detainees for tuberculosis, the Court has attached particular weight to early drug susceptibility testing and has condemned delays in recommending and performing such a test in the initial stages of the diagnostic process (see Gladkiy v. Russia, no. 3242/03, § 93, 21 December 2010, Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, § 90, 22 November 2011, and Kushnir v. Ukraine, no. 42184/09, § 146, 11 December 2014).
  • EGMR, 23.04.2013 - 65391/09

    ILDANI v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 8543/04

    CUPRAKOVS v. LATVIA

  • EGMR, 09.06.2015 - 26562/07

    TAGAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 17012/09

    IRAKLI MINDADZE v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 20.11.2012 - 45566/08

    GOLOSHVILI v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 23.11.2017 - 37747/08

    KITIASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 22.11.2016 - 49106/09

    VASILYADI v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 12646/15

    MAYLENSKIY v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 08.01.2013 - 10799/06

    JASHI v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 29.06.2017 - 33323/08

    POGHOSOV v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 06.10.2015 - 17081/06

    METIN GÜLTEKIN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 26.05.2015 - 75468/10

    OLSOY v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 27.03.2018 - 13748/11

    OGUR c. TURQUIE

  • EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 9342/16

    KAYA ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  • EGMR, 24.11.2015 - 64987/14

    TEDLIASHVILI AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 16.06.2015 - 21785/10

    BREGADZE v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 17.12.2013 - 25776/05

    DIMITROVI v. BULGARIA

  • EGMR, 19.09.2017 - 5137/09

    ELBAKIDZE v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 43174/08

    MTCHEDLISHVILI v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 20.05.2014 - 60909/08

    CHKOTUA AND ARKANIA v. GEORGIA

  • EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 47590/06

    RUDEVITS v. LATVIA

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht