Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 77845/01   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2005,52699
EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 77845/01 (https://dejure.org/2005,52699)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 24.05.2005 - 77845/01 (https://dejure.org/2005,52699)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 24. Mai 2005 - 77845/01 (https://dejure.org/2005,52699)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2005,52699) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    DERECI v. TURKEY

    Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41 MRK
    Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - global award Pecuniary damage - global award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

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 ... (17)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

  • EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

    PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 77845/01
    The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in cases raising similar issues to the one in the present application (see, for example, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II, and Ertürk v. Turkey, no. 15259/02, 12 April 2005).
  • EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

    LABITA c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 77845/01
    The persistence of reasonable suspicion that the person arrested has committed an offence is a sine qua non for the validity of the continued detention, but after a certain lapse of time, it no longer suffices; the Court must then establish whether the other grounds cited by the judicial authorities continue to justify the deprivation of liberty (see, among other authorities, Ilijkov v. Bulgaria, no. 33977/96, § 77, 26 July 2001, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95,§§ 152-153, ECHR 2000-IV).
  • EGMR, 26.07.2001 - 33977/96

    ILIJKOV v. BULGARIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 77845/01
    The persistence of reasonable suspicion that the person arrested has committed an offence is a sine qua non for the validity of the continued detention, but after a certain lapse of time, it no longer suffices; the Court must then establish whether the other grounds cited by the judicial authorities continue to justify the deprivation of liberty (see, among other authorities, Ilijkov v. Bulgaria, no. 33977/96, § 77, 26 July 2001, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95,§§ 152-153, ECHR 2000-IV).
  • EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87

    TOMASI c. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 77845/01
    Although, in general, the expression "the state of evidence" may be a relevant factor for the existence and persistence of serious indications of guilt, in the present case it nevertheless, alone, cannot justify the length of the detention of which the applicant complains (see Letellier v. France, judgment of 26 June 1991, Series A no. 207; Tomasi v. France, judgment of 27 August 1992, Series A no. 241-A; Mansur v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-B, § 55, and Demirel, cited above, § 59).
  • EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

    LETELLIER c. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 77845/01
    Although, in general, the expression "the state of evidence" may be a relevant factor for the existence and persistence of serious indications of guilt, in the present case it nevertheless, alone, cannot justify the length of the detention of which the applicant complains (see Letellier v. France, judgment of 26 June 1991, Series A no. 207; Tomasi v. France, judgment of 27 August 1992, Series A no. 241-A; Mansur v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A no. 319-B, § 55, and Demirel, cited above, § 59).
  • EGMR, 11.07.2023 - 68309/16

    BARANSU c. TÜRKIYE

    La Cour rappelle qu'elle a déjà examiné des cas similaires et a conclu à maintes reprises à la violation de l'article 5 § 3 de la Convention (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Dereci c. Turquie, no 77845/01, §§ 34-41, 24 mai 2005, et Taciroglu c. Turquie, no 25324/02, §§ 18-24, 2 février 2006).
  • EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 44021/07

    AYSU v. TURKEY

    The Court has frequently found violations of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in cases raising similar issues to those in the present application (see, for example, Atıcı v. Turkey, no. 19735/02, 10 May 2007; Solmaz v. Turkey, no. 27561/02, ECHR 2007-II (extracts); Dereci v. Turkey, no. 77845/01, 24 May 2005; and TaciroÄ?lu v. Turkey, no. 25324/02, 2 February 2006).
  • EGMR, 13.05.2014 - 15234/05

    AÇAN ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

    La Cour rappelle qu'elle a déjà examiné des affaires portant sur des faits et griefs similaires et a conclu à maintes reprises à la violation de l'article 5 § 3 de la Convention (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Solmaz c. Turquie, no 27561/02, §§ 41-44, 16 janvier 2007, Dereci c. Turquie, no 77845/01, §§ 34-41, 24 mai 2005, TaciroÄ?lu c. Turquie, no 25324/02, §§ 18-24, 2 février 2006, et Tunce et autres c. Turquie, nos 2422/06, 3712/08, 3714/08, 3715/08, 3717/08, 3718/08, 3719/08, 3724/08, 3725/08, 3728/08, 3730/08, 3731/08, 3733/08, 3734/08, 3735/08, 3737/08, 3739/08, 3740/08, 3745/08, et 3746/08, § 18, 13 octobre 2009.
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