Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KUC v. SLOVAKIA

  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention) (englisch)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  KUC v. SLOVAKIA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4 MRK
  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 37498/14
• EGMR, 24.04.2019 - 37498/14

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 30.01.2003 - 38884/97

  NIKOLOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 37498/14

  In exercising this function, the Court has to ensure that the domestic courts" arguments for and against release must not be "general and abstract" (see, for example, Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 63, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts), and Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 73, 30 January 2003), but contain references to specific facts and the personal circumstances justifying an applicant's detention (see, mutatis mutandis, Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, § 107, 8 February 2005).

  While the Court takes note of the Government's contentions, it is the national courts" responsibility to set out the arguments for or against detention in their decisions after they had examined them (see, for example, Labita v. Italy ([GC], cited above, § 170); or Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, §§ 74 et seq., 30 January 2003).

• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 37498/14

  Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also be satisfied that the national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see, among other authorities, Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 35, Series A no. 207; Yagci and Sargin v. Turkey, 8 June 1995, § 50, Series A no. 319-A; and Buzadji v. the Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, § 87, ECHR 2016 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 08.02.2005 - 45100/98

  PANCHENKO v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 37498/14

  In exercising this function, the Court has to ensure that the domestic courts" arguments for and against release must not be "general and abstract" (see, for example, Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 63, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts), and Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 73, 30 January 2003), but contain references to specific facts and the personal circumstances justifying an applicant's detention (see, mutatis mutandis, Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, § 107, 8 February 2005).

 
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 48183/99

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 37498/14

  In exercising this function, the Court has to ensure that the domestic courts" arguments for and against release must not be "general and abstract" (see, for example, Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 63, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts), and Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 73, 30 January 2003), but contain references to specific facts and the personal circumstances justifying an applicant's detention (see, mutatis mutandis, Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, § 107, 8 February 2005).
• EGMR, 12.12.1991 - 12718/87

  CLOOTH v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 37498/14

  The Court is therefore satisfied that until the applicant's first conviction, the domestic authorities could reasonably fear in the circumstances of the case that the applicant would commit new offences and abscond, given his past history and character (see Clooth v. Belgium, 12 December 1991, § 40, Series A no. 225, and Paradysz v. France, no. 17020/05, § 71, 29 October 2009).
• EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90

  YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 37498/14

  Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also be satisfied that the national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see, among other authorities, Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 35, Series A no. 207; Yagci and Sargin v. Turkey, 8 June 1995, § 50, Series A no. 319-A; and Buzadji v. the Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, § 87, ECHR 2016 (extracts)).