Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MILADINOV AND OTHERS v. \

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review) ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MILADINOV AND OTHERS v. \

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
  [MKD] Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review) ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  DIMITAR MILADINOV v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA" and 2 other applications

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 2 MRK
  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09, 50570/09, 50576/09
• EGMR, 05.09.2018 - 46398/09

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 58148/00

  ÉDITIONS PLON c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09

  According to the Court's case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as this relates to the violations found and it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see Editions Plon v. France, no. 58148/00, § 64, ECHR 2004-IV).
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 46133/99

  SMIRNOVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09

  The arguments for and against release must not be "general and abstract" (see Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 63, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts)).
• EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 38822/97

  Recht auf Freiheit und Sicherheit (zur Wahrnehmung richterlicher Aufgaben …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09

  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).

 
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09

  Furthermore, an extension order requires a more solid basis to show not only that there was genuinely "a reasonable suspicion", but also that there were other serious public-interest considerations which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighed the right to liberty (see Perica Oreb, cited above, §§ 114 and 116; Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, § 105, 8 February 2005; and Letellier v. France, judgment of 26 June 1991, Series A no. 207, § 43)).
• EGMR, 19.09.2006 - 23037/04

  MATIJASEVIC v. SERBIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09

  The present cases were accordingly distinguishable from that giving rise to the Matijasevic judgment, where the domestic courts had expressly stated that the applicant had "committed the criminal offences which are the subject of this prosecution" (see Matijasevic v. Serbia, no. 23037/04, § 7, ECHR 2006-X).
• EGMR, 06.11.2012 - 36653/09

  TRIFKOVIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09

  In such cases, the Court must establish whether the other grounds given by the judicial authorities continued to justify the deprivation of liberty (see Trifkovic v. Croatia, no. 36653/09, § 118, 6 November 2012).
• EGMR, 31.10.2013 - 20824/09

  PERICA OREB v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09

  It is essentially on the basis of the reasons given in these decisions and of the true facts mentioned by the applicant in his appeals that the Court is called upon to decide whether or not there has been a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 152, ECHR 2000-IV, and Perica Oreb v. Croatia, no. 20824/09, § 107, 31 October 2013).
• EGMR, 17.02.2011 - 22745/06

  ATANASOV v.

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 46398/09

  In this context, importance is to be attached to, inter alia, the appearance of the fair administration of justice and to the increased sensitivity of the public to the fair administration of justice (see Atanasov v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 22745/06, § 31, 17 February 2011, in the context of Article 6 of the Convention).