Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2015,5109
EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06 (https://dejure.org/2015,5109)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 24.03.2015 - 38510/06 (https://dejure.org/2015,5109)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 24. März 2015 - 38510/06 (https://dejure.org/2015,5109)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,5109) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    STETTNER v. POLAND

    Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
    No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention) No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Review by a court Speediness of review) ...

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 (9)

  • EGMR, 20.01.2009 - 28300/06

    SLAWOMIR MUSIAL v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    The provisions pertaining to medical care in detention facilities and general conditions of detention, and the relevant domestic law and practice are set out in the Court's judgments in the cases of Kaprykowski v. Poland, no. 23052/05, §§ 36-39, 3 February 2009; Slawomir Musial v. Poland, no. 28300/06, §§ 48-61, 20 January 2009; and Orchowski v. Poland, no. 17885/04, §§ 74-85, 13 October 2009.

    However, this provision does require the State to ensure that prisoners are detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject them to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, their health and well-being are adequately secured by, among other things, providing them with the requisite medical assistance (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 94, ECHR 2000-XI; Slawomir Musial v. Poland, no. 28300/06, § 86, 20 January 2009; and Kaprykowski v. Poland, no. 23052/05, § 69, 3 February 2009).

  • EGMR, 22.05.2012 - 5826/03

    IDALOV c. RUSSIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    The question whether the right to a speedy decision has been respected must - as is the case for the "reasonable time" stipulation in Articles 5 § 3 and 6 § 1 of the Convention - be determined in the light of the circumstances of each case (see Rehbock v. Slovenia, no. 29462/95, § 84, ECHR 2000-XII; Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, § 154, 22 May 2012), including the complexity of the proceedings, their conduct by the domestic authorities and by the applicant and what was at stake for the latter (see Mooren v. Germany [GC], no. 11364/03, § 106, 9 July 2009).
  • EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

    Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    However, this provision does require the State to ensure that prisoners are detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject them to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, their health and well-being are adequately secured by, among other things, providing them with the requisite medical assistance (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 94, ECHR 2000-XI; Slawomir Musial v. Poland, no. 28300/06, § 86, 20 January 2009; and Kaprykowski v. Poland, no. 23052/05, § 69, 3 February 2009).
  • EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

    Neumeister ./. Österreich

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    As established in Neumeister v. Austria (judgment of 27 June 1968, p. 37, § 4, Series A no. 8) the second limb of Article 5 § 3 does not give judicial authorities a choice between either bringing an accused to trial within a reasonable time or granting him provisional release pending trial.
  • EGMR, 03.10.2006 - 543/03

    McKAY c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    Until conviction, he must be presumed innocent, and the purpose of the provision under consideration is essentially to require his provisional release once his continuing detention ceases to be reasonable (see McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 41, ECHR 2006-X).
  • EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 38822/97

    Recht auf Freiheit und Sicherheit (zur Wahrnehmung richterlicher Aufgaben

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    Justification for any period of detention, no matter how short, must be convincingly demonstrated by the authorities (see Shishkov v. Bulgaria, no. 38822/97, § 66, ECHR 2003-I (extracts); Belchev v. Bulgaria, no. 39270/98, § 82, 8 April 2004; Pyrak v. Poland, no. 54476/00, § 47, 12 February 2008).
  • EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 72286/01

    MELNIK v. UKRAINE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    There are three particular elements to be considered in relation to the compatibility of the applicant's health with his stay in detention: (a) the medical condition of the prisoner, (b) the adequacy of the medical assistance and care provided in detention and (c) the advisability of maintaining the detention measure in view of the state of health of the applicant (see Mouisel v. France, cited above, §§ 40-42; Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, § 94, 28 March 2006).
  • EGMR, 08.04.2004 - 39270/98

    BELCHEV v. BULGARIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    Justification for any period of detention, no matter how short, must be convincingly demonstrated by the authorities (see Shishkov v. Bulgaria, no. 38822/97, § 66, ECHR 2003-I (extracts); Belchev v. Bulgaria, no. 39270/98, § 82, 8 April 2004; Pyrak v. Poland, no. 54476/00, § 47, 12 February 2008).
  • EGMR, 12.02.2008 - 54476/00

    PYRAK v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 38510/06
    Justification for any period of detention, no matter how short, must be convincingly demonstrated by the authorities (see Shishkov v. Bulgaria, no. 38822/97, § 66, ECHR 2003-I (extracts); Belchev v. Bulgaria, no. 39270/98, § 82, 8 April 2004; Pyrak v. Poland, no. 54476/00, § 47, 12 February 2008).
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