Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 22662/13, 51059/13, 58823/13, 59692/13, 59700/13, 60115/13, 69425/13, 72824/13   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2017,16174
EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 22662/13, 51059/13, 58823/13, 59692/13, 59700/13, 60115/13, 69425/13, 72824/13 (https://dejure.org/2017,16174)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 23.05.2017 - 22662/13, 51059/13, 58823/13, 59692/13, 59700/13, 60115/13, 69425/13, 72824/13 (https://dejure.org/2017,16174)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 23. Mai 2017 - 22662/13, 51059/13, 58823/13, 59692/13, 59700/13, 60115/13, 69425/13, 72824/13 (https://dejure.org/2017,16174)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,16174) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    MATIOSAITIS AND OTHERS v. LITHUANIA

    Struck out of the list (Article 37-1-a - Absence of intention to pursue petition);Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient ...

Sonstiges

Verfahrensgang

 
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 ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

  • EGMR, 20.05.2014 - 73593/10

    LÁSZLÓ MAGYAR v. HUNGARY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 22662/13
    Having excluded all the other possibilities for mitigating life sentences in Lithuania, the Court finds that a stricter scrutiny of the regulation and practice of presidential pardon, which the Government saw as the most effective measure, is required (see László Magyar v. Hungary, no. 73593/10, § 56, 20 May 2014).

    In the case of László Magyar v. Hungary (no. 73593/10, 20 May 2014), the Court found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on the basis that the Hungarian presidential pardon system did not conform to the requirements of post-conviction Vinter review for three reasons.

    To highlight just a few: Öcalan v. Turkey (no. 2) (nos. 24069/03, 197/04, 6201/06 and 10464/07, 18 March 2014); László Magyar v. Hungary (no. 73593/10, 20 May 2014); Harakchiev and Tolumov v. Bulgaria (nos. 15018/11 and 61199/12, ECHR 2014 (extracts)); Cacko v. Slovakia (no. 49905/08, 22 July 2014); Trabelsi v. Belgium (no. 140/10, ECHR 2014 (extracts)); Murray (cited above); T.P. and A.T. v. Hungary (cited above); and, finally, Hutchinson (cited above).

  • EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 130/10
    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 22662/13
    The applicants referred to the Court's case-law to the effect that a life prisoner was entitled to know, at the start of his sentence, what he must do to be considered for release (the applicants referred to Vinter and Others v. the United Kingdom ([GC], nos. 66069/09, 130/10 and 3896/10, § 122, 9 July 2013).

    However, we consider it necessary to write separately as parts of the reasoning do not, in our opinion, fully reflect the scope and content of the Court's case-law in this area as it has developed since the Grand Chamber delivered its judgment in Vinter and Others v. the United Kingdom in 2013 ([GC], nos. 66069/09, 130/10 and 3896/10, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).

    Hutchinson, just like the instant judgment, goes on to refer to and cite not only Vinter and Others v. the United Kingdom ([GC], nos. 66069/09, 130/10 and 3896/10, ECHR 2013 (extracts)) and one of the most important post-Vinter judgments, Murray v. the Netherlands ([GC] no. 10511/10, ECHR 2016), but also the earlier judgment in Kafkaris v. Cyprus (no. 21906/04, ECHR 2008).

  • EGMR, 18.03.2014 - 24069/03

    ÖCALAN c. TURQUIE (N° 2)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 22662/13
    The Court has also consistently held that the commutation of life imprisonment because of terminal illness, which only means that a prisoner is allowed to die at home or in a hospice rather than behind prison walls, cannot be considered as a "prospect of release", as the notion is understood by the Court (see Vinter and Others, cited above, § 127, and Öcalan v. Turkey (no. 2) (nos. 24069/03 and 3 others, § 203, 18 March 2014).

    To highlight just a few: Öcalan v. Turkey (no. 2) (nos. 24069/03, 197/04, 6201/06 and 10464/07, 18 March 2014); László Magyar v. Hungary (no. 73593/10, 20 May 2014); Harakchiev and Tolumov v. Bulgaria (nos. 15018/11 and 61199/12, ECHR 2014 (extracts)); Cacko v. Slovakia (no. 49905/08, 22 July 2014); Trabelsi v. Belgium (no. 140/10, ECHR 2014 (extracts)); Murray (cited above); T.P. and A.T. v. Hungary (cited above); and, finally, Hutchinson (cited above).

  • EGMR, 04.09.2014 - 140/10

    Belgien wegen Auslieferung von Ex-Fußballprofi verurteilt

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 22662/13
    To highlight just a few: Öcalan v. Turkey (no. 2) (nos. 24069/03, 197/04, 6201/06 and 10464/07, 18 March 2014); László Magyar v. Hungary (no. 73593/10, 20 May 2014); Harakchiev and Tolumov v. Bulgaria (nos. 15018/11 and 61199/12, ECHR 2014 (extracts)); Cacko v. Slovakia (no. 49905/08, 22 July 2014); Trabelsi v. Belgium (no. 140/10, ECHR 2014 (extracts)); Murray (cited above); T.P. and A.T. v. Hungary (cited above); and, finally, Hutchinson (cited above).
  • EGMR, 22.07.2014 - 49905/08

    CACKO v. SLOVAKIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 22662/13
    To highlight just a few: Öcalan v. Turkey (no. 2) (nos. 24069/03, 197/04, 6201/06 and 10464/07, 18 March 2014); László Magyar v. Hungary (no. 73593/10, 20 May 2014); Harakchiev and Tolumov v. Bulgaria (nos. 15018/11 and 61199/12, ECHR 2014 (extracts)); Cacko v. Slovakia (no. 49905/08, 22 July 2014); Trabelsi v. Belgium (no. 140/10, ECHR 2014 (extracts)); Murray (cited above); T.P. and A.T. v. Hungary (cited above); and, finally, Hutchinson (cited above).
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