Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 24.11.2011 - 19213/04 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,55457) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
TSYGONIY v. UKRAINE
Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 13, Art. 41, Art. 46, Art. 46 Abs. 2 MRK
Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 5-1 Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 5-4 Violation of Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - award ...
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Tsygoniy v. Ukraine
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 72286/01
MELNIK v. UKRAINE
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2011 - 19213/04
The Government raised non-exhaustion arguments, similar to those rejected by the Court in a number of other cases where the complaints concerned problems of a structural nature in the domestic penitentiary system in question (see, for example, Kalashnikov v. Russia (dec.), no. 47095/99, ECHR 2001-XI (extracts); Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 69-71, 28 March 2006; and Koktysh v. Ukraine, no. 43707/07, § 86, 10 December 2009). - EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
ISTRATII v. MOLDOVA
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2011 - 19213/04
8721/05, 8705/05 and 8742/05, § 71, 27 March 2007), the Court finds that the conditions of the applicant's detention were inhuman and degrading. - EGMR, 19.07.2007 - 36898/03
TREPASHKIN v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2011 - 19213/04
Regard being had to the accounts provided by the parties in the present case and the Court's case-law (see, among other authorities, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 102, ECHR 2002-VI; Dvoynykh v. Ukraine, no. 72277/01, § 67, 12 October 2006; Melnik v. Ukraine, cited above, § 107-112; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, § 44, 2 June 2005; Trepashkin v. Russia, no. 36898/03, § 93, 19 July 2007; and Istratii and Others v. Moldova, nos. - EGMR, 10.12.2009 - 43707/07
KOKTYSH v. UKRAINE
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2011 - 19213/04
The Government raised non-exhaustion arguments, similar to those rejected by the Court in a number of other cases where the complaints concerned problems of a structural nature in the domestic penitentiary system in question (see, for example, Kalashnikov v. Russia (dec.), no. 47095/99, ECHR 2001-XI (extracts); Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, §§ 69-71, 28 March 2006; and Koktysh v. Ukraine, no. 43707/07, § 86, 10 December 2009).