Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AKMAN v. TURKEY

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 8, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 18, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 38, Art. 38 Abs. 1 Buchst. b, Art. 38 Abs. 2 MRK
  Struck out of the list (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  AKMAN c. TURQUIE

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 6, Art. 8, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 18, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 38, Art. 38 Abs. 1 Buchst. b, Art. 38 Abs. 2 MRK
  Radiation du rôle (französisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 21.09.1999 - 37453/97
• EGMR, 26.06.2001 - 37453/97

Wird zitiert von ... (58)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21594/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines türkischen Staatsangehörigen durch türkische …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2001 - 37453/97

  The Court notes in this regard that it has specified the nature and extent of the obligations which arise for the respondent State in cases of alleged unlawful killings by members of the security forces under Articles 2 and 13 of the Convention (see for example, Kaya, cited above, pp. 324-26, §§ 86-92, and pp. 329-31, §§ 106-08; Güleç v. Turkey, judgment of 27 July 1998, Reports 1998-IV, pp. 1729-30, §§ 69-73, and pp. 1731-33, §§ 77-82; Yasa v. Turkey, judgment of 2 September 1998, Reports 1998-VI, pp. 2438-41, §§ 98-108, and pp. 2441-42, §§ 112-15; OÄ?ur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, §§ 76-93, ECHR 1999-III; and Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, §§ 76-95 and 100-02, 14 December 2000, unreported).
• EGMR, 14.12.2000 - 22676/93

  GÜL v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2001 - 37453/97

  The Court notes in this regard that it has specified the nature and extent of the obligations which arise for the respondent State in cases of alleged unlawful killings by members of the security forces under Articles 2 and 13 of the Convention (see for example, Kaya, cited above, pp. 324-26, §§ 86-92, and pp. 329-31, §§ 106-08; Güleç v. Turkey, judgment of 27 July 1998, Reports 1998-IV, pp. 1729-30, §§ 69-73, and pp. 1731-33, §§ 77-82; Yasa v. Turkey, judgment of 2 September 1998, Reports 1998-VI, pp. 2438-41, §§ 98-108, and pp. 2441-42, §§ 112-15; OÄ?ur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, §§ 76-93, ECHR 1999-III; and Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, §§ 76-95 and 100-02, 14 December 2000, unreported).

• EGMR, 03.12.2019 - 44896/11

  CIOBANU v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  For the reasons set out above, the Court finds that the Government have failed to submit a statement offering a sufficient basis for finding that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention does not require the Court to continue its examination of the case (see, by contrast, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, §§ 23-24, ECHR 2001-VI).
• EGMR, 29.09.2005 - 25149/03

  Rechtssache V. H. gegen die NIEDERLANDE

  Bei der Entscheidung, ob die vorliegende Rechtssache im Register zu streichen ist, berücksichtigt der Gerichtshof die Kriterien, die sich aus seiner Rechtsprechung ergeben (siehe Tahsin Acar ./. Türkei [GK], Individualbeschwerde Nr. 26307/95, Rndr. 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; und ebenfalls Haran ./. Türkei , Individualbeschwerde Nr. 25754/94, Urteil vom 26. März 2002, Akman ./. Türkei (Streichung), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI, und Meriakri ./. Republik Moldau (Streichung), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 53487/99, 1. März 2005).
• EGMR, 04.10.2006 - 76642/01

  ASSOCIATION SOS ATTENTATS ET DE BOERY c. FRANCE

  The Court has, for example, ruled that in certain circumstances it may be appropriate to strike an application out of its list of cases under this provision on the basis of a unilateral declaration by the respondent Government even though the applicant wishes the examination of the merits of his case to be continued (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary issue) [GC], no. 26307/95, § 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; see also, in particular, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI; Haran v. Turkey, no. 25754/94, 26 March 2002; Meriakri v. Moldova (striking out), no. 53487/99, 1 March 2005; and Van Houten v. the Netherlands (striking out), no. 25149/03, ECHR 2005-IX).

 
• EGMR, 14.11.2006 - 6923/03

  MELNIC v. MOLDOVA

  On the facts and for the reasons set out above, the Court finds that the Government failed to submit a statement offering a sufficient basis for finding that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention does not require the Court to continue its examination of the case (see, by contrast, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, §§ 23-24, ECHR 2001-VI).
• EGMR, 25.07.2013 - 27183/04

  ROUSK v. SWEDEN

  Thus, having regard to what has been stated above and the facts of the present case, the Court finds that the unilateral declaration does not offer satisfactory redress to the applicant and that, consequently, the Government have failed to establish a sufficient basis for finding that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention does not require the Court to continue its examination of the case (see, Prencipe v. Monaco, no. 43376/06, § 63, 16 July 2009; see also, by contrast, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, §§ 23-24, ECHR 2001-VI, and Van Houten v. the Netherlands (striking out), no. 25149/03, §§ 34-37, ECHR 2005-IX).
• EGMR, 02.06.2009 - 29705/05

  Recht auf Freiheit der Person und Recht auf Akteneinsicht (Recht auf ein faires …

  Zu diesem Zweck prüft der Gerichtshof die Erklärung sorgfältig im Lichte der Kriterien, die sich aus seiner Rechtsprechung ergeben (…siehe Tahsin Acar ./. Türkei [GK], Individualbeschwerde Nr. 26307/95, Rdnr. 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI;… und ebenfalls Haran ./. Türkei , Individualbeschwerde Nr. 25754/94, Rdnr. 23, Urteil vom 26. März 2002, Akman ./. Türkei (Streichung), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 37453/97, Rdnr. 30-31, ECHR 2001-VI, Meriakri ./. Republik Moldau (Streichung), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 53487/99, Rdnr. 30-32, 1. März 2005; MacDonald ./. Vereinigtes Königreich (Entsch.), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 301/04, 6. Februar 2007 und O. ./. Deutschland (Entsch.), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 31384/02, 11. September 2007).
• EGMR, 24.10.2002 - 36732/97

  PISANO c. ITALIE

  Cela n'exclut pourtant pas d'appliquer les alinéas b) ou c) sans l'accord du requérant, le consentement de celui-ci n'étant pas une condition à cet égard (voir Akman c. Turquie (radiation), no 37453/97, CEDH 2001-VI).
• EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 63214/00

  OHLEN v. DENMARK

  That does not, however, rule out the possibility of applying sub-paragraphs (b) and (c), the applicant's consent not being a prerequisite for their application (see Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI, and Pisano v. Italy [GC] (striking out), no. 36732/97, § 41, 24 October 2002).
• EGMR, 28.09.2006 - 32786/03

  SILCHENKO v. RUSSIA

  On the facts, the Court observes that the Government failed to submit any formal statement capable of falling into that category and offering a sufficient basis for finding that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention does not require the Court to continue its examination of the case (see, by contrast, Akman v. Turkey (striking out), no. 37453/97, §§ 23-24, ECHR 2001-VI).
• EGMR, 06.03.2012 - 45293/06

  ATMACA v. GERMANY

  "... Der Gerichtshof hat beispielsweise befunden, dass es unter gewissen Umständen angemessen sein kann, eine Individualbeschwerde aufgrund einer einseitigen Erklärung der beschwerdegegnerischen Regierung nach dieser Bestimmung in seinem Register zu streichen, auch wenn der Beschwerdeführer eine weitere Prüfung der Begründetheit seiner Beschwerde wünscht (siehe Tahsin Acar ./. Türkei (Vorfrage) [GK], Individualbeschwerde Nr. 26307/95, Rdnrn. 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; siehe auch, insbesondere, Akman ./. Türkei (Streichung), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 37453/97, ECHR 2001-VI; Haran ./. Türkei , Individualbeschwerde Nr. 25754/94, 26. März 2002; Meriakri ./. Moldau (Streichung), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 53487/99, 1. März 2005; und Van Houten ./. die Niederlande (Streichung), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 25149/03, ECHR 2005-IX).
• EGMR, 20.10.2005 - 37930/02

  BAZHENOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 26.03.2002 - 25754/94

  HARAN v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 21.01.2016 - 576/06

  SAFARYAN v. ARMENIA
• EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 26872/05

  CEKA v. ALBANIA
• EGMR, 24.02.2009 - 7365/05

  DECEV v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 06.10.2005 - 63973/00

  ANDROSOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 03.03.2009 - 28692/06

  VOORHUIS v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 13.05.2008 - 34909/04

  P. G. gegen Deutschland
• EGMR, 27.09.2007 - 6301/05

  THE ESTATE OF NITSCHKE v. SWEDEN
• EGMR, 13.02.2007 - 31535/03

  VENERA-NORD-VEST BORTA A.G. v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 10.05.2022 - 74048/17

  TOTOPA c. ESPAGNE
• EGMR, 05.05.2022 - 6316/07

  LANNI ET AUTRES c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 62637/11

  DZIEDZIC v. POLAND
• EGMR, 04.06.2013 - 46161/11

  GIL v. POLAND
• EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 37811/04

  PANOV v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 04.12.2008 - 8355/07

  YEVDOKIYA KUZNETSOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.11.2008 - 7101/06

  MALAI v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 27.03.2008 - 29370/05

  TIERCE c. SAINT-MARIN
• EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 73192/01

  WAWRZYNOWICZ v. POLAND
• EGMR, 02.11.2006 - 26410/02

  KAZARTSEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.04.2006 - 22519/02

  ALEKHINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.04.2006 - 26724/03

  AGIBALOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 02.03.2006 - 37927/02

  NIKOLAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 30.06.2022 - 330/05

  CARZEDDA v. ITALY
• EGMR, 08.04.2014 - 78205/11

  OSUCH v. POLAND
• EGMR, 04.06.2013 - 72733/10

  MARGARYAN v. ARMENIA
• EGMR, 18.05.2010 - 31103/06

  CUBAN v. THE NETHERLANDS (V)
• EGMR, 23.09.2008 - 2914/02

  PREPELITA v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 27.03.2008 - 4543/02

  KOROTKIKH v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.03.2008 - 26307/02

  SHIRYKALOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.11.2007 - 2245/05

  SUBOCHEVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 30.11.2006 - 10833/03

  SHITIKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 04.07.2006 - 72558/01

  BLAGOVESTNYY v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 32321/03

  DENU v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 66462/01

  BRATCHIKOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 13995/02

  KAZARTSEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 22534/02

  MIKHAYLOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 39866/02

  SHESTOPALOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 7237/03

  VALENTINA VASILYEVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 24651/03

  TOLOKONNIKOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 24657/03

  GERASIMENKO v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 24659/03

  IVANNIKOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 27295/03

  KORCHAGINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 01.03.2022 - 42582/13

  AXENTII v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 32420/07

  M.S.-D. AND I.D. v. POLAND
• EGMR, 17.11.2005 - 24654/03

  BOBROVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 16.06.2009 - 10470/07

  MOL v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 08.02.2007 - 3436/05

  ALEKSANDR IVANOV v. RUSSIA