Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87, 89/1991/341/414   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/1993,8759
EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87, 89/1991/341/414 (https://dejure.org/1993,8759)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 25.03.1993 - 13134/87, 89/1991/341/414 (https://dejure.org/1993,8759)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 25. März 1993 - 13134/87, 89/1991/341/414 (https://dejure.org/1993,8759)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1993,8759) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

Besprechungen u.ä.

  • HRR Strafrecht (Aufsatz mit Bezug zur Entscheidung)

    Zur «Einzelfallprüfung» und «geltungszeitlichen Interpretation» im Rahmen des Art. 3 EMRK (Dr. Daniela Demko; HRRS 3/2005, S. 94 ff.)

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 ... (142)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

  • EGMR, 25.04.1978 - 5856/72

    Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    In its Tyrer v. the United Kingdom judgment of 25 April 1978 (Series A no. 26), the Court has already held that corporal punishment may constitute an assault on a person's dignity and physical integrity as protected under Article 3 (art. 3).

    Factors such as the nature and context of the punishment, the manner and method of its execution, its duration, its physical and mental effects and, in some instances, the sex, age and state of health of the victim must all be taken into account (see the Ireland v. the United Kingdom judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A no. 25, p. 65, para. 162, the above-mentioned Tyrer judgment, Series A no. 26, pp. 14-15, paras. 29-30, and the above-mentioned Soering judgment, Series A no. 161, p. 39, para. 100).

    A punishment which does not occasion such effects may fall within the ambit of Article 3 (art. 3) (see the above-mentioned Tyrer judgment, Series A no. 26, pp. 16-17, para. 33), provided that in the particular circumstances of the case it may be said to have reached the minimum threshold of severity required.

  • EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5095/71

    KJELDSEN, BUSK MADSEN AND PEDERSEN v. DENMARK

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    It recalls that the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols must be read as a whole (see the Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v. Denmark judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 23, pp. 26 and 27, paras. 52 and 54, and the Soering v. the United Kingdom judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 161, p. 40, para. 103).

    The fundamental right of everyone to education is a right guaranteed equally to pupils in State and independent schools, no distinction being made between the two (see, mutatis mutandis, the above-mentioned Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen judgment, Series A no. 23, p. 24, para. 50).

  • EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

    Jens Söring

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    It recalls that the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols must be read as a whole (see the Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v. Denmark judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 23, pp. 26 and 27, paras. 52 and 54, and the Soering v. the United Kingdom judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 161, p. 40, para. 103).

    Factors such as the nature and context of the punishment, the manner and method of its execution, its duration, its physical and mental effects and, in some instances, the sex, age and state of health of the victim must all be taken into account (see the Ireland v. the United Kingdom judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A no. 25, p. 65, para. 162, the above-mentioned Tyrer judgment, Series A no. 26, pp. 14-15, paras. 29-30, and the above-mentioned Soering judgment, Series A no. 161, p. 39, para. 100).

     
  • EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13710/88

    NIEMIETZ v. GERMANY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    The Court agrees with the Government that the notion of "private life" is a broad one, which, as it held in its recent judgment in the case of Niemietz v. Germany (16 December 1992, Series A no. 251-B, p. 11, para. 29), is not susceptible to exhaustive definition.
  • EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

    BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    Notwithstanding its findings that no right guaranteed by either Article 3 (art. 3) or Article 8 (art. 8) has been violated, the Court must, in accordance with its case-law, consider the applicant's claim under Article 13 (art. 13), provided that his grievances under Articles 3 and 8 (art. 3, art. 8) can be regarded as "arguable" in terms of the Convention (see, among other authorities, the Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, p. 23, para. 52).
  • EGMR, 29.11.1991 - 12742/87

    PINE VALLEY DEVELOPMENTS LTD ET AUTRES c. IRLANDE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    Secondly, the effectiveness of a remedy for the purposes of Article 13 (art. 13) does not depend on the certainty of a favourable outcome (see, as the most recent authority, the Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v. Ireland judgment of 29 November 1991, Series A no. 222, p. 27, para. 66); in any event it is not for the Court to speculate as to what decision the English courts would have reached, given particularly the latitude which those courts would have to apply relevant contemporary standards (see paragraph 15 in fine above).
  • EGMR, 13.08.1981 - 7601/76

    YOUNG, JAMES ET WEBSTER c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    The Court has consistently held that the responsibility of a State is engaged if a violation of one of the rights and freedoms defined in the Convention is the result of non-observance by that State of its obligation under Article 1 (art. 1) to secure those rights and freedoms in its domestic law to everyone within its jurisdiction (see, mutatis mutandis, the Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, p. 20, para. 49).
  • EGMR, 25.02.1982 - 7511/76

    CAMPBELL ET COSANS c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    Functions relating to the internal administration of a school, such as discipline, cannot be said to be merely ancillary to the educational process (see, mutatis mutandis, the Campbell and Cosans v. the United Kingdom judgment of 25 February 1982, Series A no. 48, p. 14, para. 33).
  • EGMR, 23.11.1983 - 8919/80

    VAN DER MUSSELE c. BELGIQUE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    Thirdly, the Court agrees with the applicant that the State cannot absolve itself from responsibility by delegating its obligations to private bodies or individuals (see, mutatis mutandis, the Van der Mussele v. Belgium judgment of 23 November 1983, Series A no. 70, pp. 14-15, paras. 28-30).
  • EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 61603/00

    Konventionskonforme Auslegung des deutschen (Zivil-)Rechts …

    Nach der ständigen Rechtsprechung des Gerichtshofs greift die Verantwortlichkeit eines Staates ein, wenn die Verletzung eines der Rechte und Grundfreiheiten, wie sie in der Konvention definiert sind, sich daraus ergibt, dass der betreffende Staat seiner Verpflichtung nach Artikel 1 nicht nachgekommen ist, allen seiner Hoheitsgewalt unterstehenden Personen diese Rechte und Grundfreiheiten in seinem innerstaatlichen Recht zuzusichern (siehe u. a. Rechtssache Costello-Roberts ./. Vereinigtes Königreich , Urteil vom 25. März 1993, Serie A, Bd. 247-C, S. 57, Nr. 26, sowie Rechtssache Wos ./. Polen (Entsch.) , Individualbeschwerde Nr. 22860/02, 1. März 2005, Nr. 60).
  • EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02

    Opuz ./. Türkei

    L'appréciation de ce minimum est relative ; elle dépend de l'ensemble des données de la cause, et notamment de la nature et du contexte du traitement, de sa durée, de ses effets physiques ou mentaux ainsi que, parfois, du sexe, de l'âge et de l'état de santé de la victime (voir Costello-Roberts c. Royaume-Uni, 25 mars 1993, § 30, série A no 247-C).
  • EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 27725/10

    MOHAMMED HUSSEIN AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS AND ITALY

    These standards imply that the ill-treatment the applicant alleges he or she will face if returned must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this is relative, depending on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration, nature and context of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 30, Series A no. 247-C; Hilal v. the United Kingdom, no. 45276/99, § 60, ECHR 2001-II; and El Masri, cited above, § 196).
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