Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 66095/09 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2014,26538) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
O.G. v. LATVIA
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. b, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. e, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Take proceedings) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1-b - Lawful order of a court Article 5-1-e - Persons of unsound mind) ...
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
O.G. v. Latvia
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 36760/06
STANEV c. BULGARIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 66095/09
In its case-law the Court has set out three minimum conditions which have to be satisfied in order for there to be "the lawful detention of a person of unsound mind" within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 (e): except in emergency cases, the individual concerned must be reliably shown to be of unsound mind, that is to say the existence of a true mental disorder must be established by a competent authority on the basis of objective medical opinion; 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, for example, Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, § 145, ECHR 2012, Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, cited above, § 39, and L.M. v. Latvia, no. 26000/02, § 46, 19 July 2011). - EGMR, 22.02.1989 - 11152/84
CIULLA v. ITALY
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 66095/09
That case is therefore to be seen as pertaining more to non- compliance with a court order, considering that the Court has previously held that the phrase "obligation prescribed by law" denotes an obligation of a specific and concrete nature already incumbent on the person concerned (see Ciulla v. Italy, 22 February 1989, § 36, Series A no. 148). - EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 31365/96
VARBANOV v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 66095/09
A medical opinion cannot be seen as sufficient to justify deprivation of liberty if a significant period of time has elapsed (see Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 47, ECHR 2000-X, and Raudevs v. Latvia, cited above, § 72). - EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73
WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 66095/09
This objective, and the broader condition that detention be "in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law", require the existence in domestic law of adequate legal protection and fair and proper procedures (see Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, 24 October 1979, § 45, Series A no. 33). - EGMR, 08.04.2004 - 71503/01
ASSANIDZE v. GEORGIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 66095/09
Turning next to the question of whether the order of the Riga Regional Court was "lawful", it is necessary to verify if it was compatible with the essential objective of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention, which is to prevent individuals being deprived of their liberty in an arbitrary fashion (see Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 170, ECHR 2004-II, and H.L. v. the United Kingdom, no. 45508/99, § 115, ECHR 2004-IX).