Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ELSNER v. AUSTRIA (No. 1)

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible No violation of Art. 5-3 (englisch)

Kurzfassungen/Presse (2)

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
• yahoo.com (Pressemeldung, 24.05.2011)

  Menschenrechtsgericht weist Klage von Ex-Bankchef Elsner ab // Gericht hält U-Haft in Österreich für rechtmäßig

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64

  Wemhoff ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 15710/07

  The Court reiterates that, in determining the length of detention on remand under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, the period to be taken into consideration begins on the day the accused is taken into custody and ends on the day when the charge is determined, even if only by a court of first instance (see, among other authorities, Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 9, Series A no. 7, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 145 and 147, ECHR 2000-IV).

  In this respect the Court reiterates that the end of the period referred to in Article 5 § 3 is "the day on which the charge is determined, even if only by a court of first instance" (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 9, Series A no. 7).

• EGMR, 03.10.2006 - 543/03

  McKAY c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 15710/07

  The Court also observes that the presumption is in favour of release (see McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 41, ECHR 2006-X).
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 15710/07

  The Court has previously decided that it falls in the first place to the national judicial authorities to ensure that the pre-trial detention of an accused person does not exceed a reasonable time (see Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 35, Series A no. 207).

 
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 15710/07

  The Court reiterates that, in determining the length of detention on remand under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, the period to be taken into consideration begins on the day the accused is taken into custody and ends on the day when the charge is determined, even if only by a court of first instance (see, among other authorities, Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 9, Series A no. 7, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 145 and 147, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 28.11.2002 - 58442/00

  LAVENTS c. LETTONIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 15710/07

  Continued detention may be justified in a given case only if there are clear indications of a genuine public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the right to liberty (see Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, § 70, 28 November 2002).
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 46133/99

  SMIRNOVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 15710/07

  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).
• EGMR, 08.06.2006 - 75039/01

  KORCHUGANOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 15710/07

  The Court reiterates that a court's decision to order and maintain a custodial measure would not breach Article 5 § 1 provided that the court had acted within its jurisdiction, had the power to make an appropriate order, and had given reasons for its decision to maintain the custodial measure, for which it had also set a time-limit (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 152-153, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Korchuganova v. Russia, no. 75039/01, § 62, 8 June 2006; and Pshevecherskiy v. Russia, no. 28957/02, §§ 41-46, 24 May 2007).
• EGMR, 24.05.2007 - 28957/02

  PSHEVECHERSKIY v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.05.2011 - 15710/07

  The Court reiterates that a court's decision to order and maintain a custodial measure would not breach Article 5 § 1 provided that the court had acted within its jurisdiction, had the power to make an appropriate order, and had given reasons for its decision to maintain the custodial measure, for which it had also set a time-limit (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 152-153, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Korchuganova v. Russia, no. 75039/01, § 62, 8 June 2006; and Pshevecherskiy v. Russia, no. 28957/02, §§ 41-46, 24 May 2007).

• EGMR - 40937/07

  [ENG]

  These events are described in detail in application no. 15710/07.

  On 26 January 2007 the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's appeal, quoting at length its previous decisions of 17 October 2006 (see 15710/07) and 6 November 2006 (see 36230/07).

  As regards the existence of a serious suspicion against him, the court referred to the charges against the applicant as described in detail in the bill of indictment of 23 October 2006 (see 15710/07), which had meanwhile become final.

  No 15710/07.

  He submitted that at various stages of the criminal proceedings against him, but in particular on the occasion of his arrest in France, numerous politicians, officials of the state and other public figures have made statements in public which amounted to finding the applicant guilty of criminal offences without having been convicted by a court (see 15710/07).

  1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, set out in the facts part of application no. 15710/07 under the heading no. 6 ("statements by politicians on the criminal proceedings against the applicant) bound to respect the presumption of innocence, and if so have they done so?.

• EGMR - 36230/07

  [ENG]

  These events are described in detail in application no. 15710/07.

  On 6 November 2006 the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's complaint of 12 October 2006 and referred at length to a previous decision of 17 October 2006 (see 15710/07).

  See application no. 15710/07.

  1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, set out in the facts part of application no. 15710/07 under the heading no. 6 ("statements by politicians on the criminal proceedings against the applicant) bound to respect the presumption of innocence, and if so have they done so?.

• EGMR - 17239/08 (anhängig)

  [ENG]

  These events are described in detail in application no. 15710/07.

  He submitted that at various stages of the criminal proceedings against him, but in particular on the occasion of his arrest in France, numerous politicians, officials of the state and other public figures have made statements in public which amounted to finding the applicant guilty of criminal offences without having been convicted by a court (see 15710/07).

  1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, set out in the facts part of application no. 15710/07 under the heading no. 6 ("statements by politicians on the criminal proceedings against the applicant) bound to respect the presumption of innocence, and if so have they done so?.

• EGMR - 41402/08 (anhängig)

  [ENG]

  These events are described in detail in application no. 15710/07.

  See application no. 15710/07.