Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TONIOLO v. SAN MARINO AND ITALY

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 35 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention Procedure prescribed by law Article 5-1-f - Extradition) ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10
• EGMR, 10.12.2014 - 44853/10

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (11)

• EGMR, 04.05.1999 - 41974/98

  KUCHERENKO contre l'UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  It follows that the pursuit of such remedies will have consequences for the identification of the "final decision" and, correspondingly, for the calculation of the starting point for the running of the six-month rule (see, for example, Kucherenko v. Unkraine, (dec.) no. 41974/98, 4 May 1999, and Prystavska v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 21287/02, 17 December 2002).
• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  "Quality of law" in this sense implies that where a national law authorises deprivation of liberty it must be sufficiently accessible, precise and foreseeable in its application, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 125, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III; and Amuur, cited above).
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 28358/95

  BARANOWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  "Quality of law" in this sense implies that where a national law authorises deprivation of liberty it must be sufficiently accessible, precise and foreseeable in its application, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 125, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III; and Amuur, cited above).

 
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  The purpose of Article 35 § 1 is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, inter alia, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

  KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  "Quality of law" in this sense implies that where a national law authorises deprivation of liberty it must be sufficiently accessible, precise and foreseeable in its application, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 125, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III; and Amuur, cited above).
• EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 40907/98

  Griechenland, Ausweisung, Abschiebung, Abschiebungshaft, Haftbedingungen, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  The Court will consider whether this requirement was met, with particular reference to the safeguards provided by the national system (see Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 54, ECHR 2001-II).
• EGMR, 21.11.2000 - 53652/00

  RAF v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  The Court reiterates that extradition proceedings do not concern a dispute ("contestation") over an applicant's civil rights and obligations (see, inter alia, RAF v. Spain (partial dec.), no. 53652/00, ECHR 2000-XI; and A.B. v. Poland (dec.), no. 33878/96, 18 October 2001).
• EGMR, 28.03.1990 - 10890/84

  GROPPERA RADIO AG ET AUTRES c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  The Court reiterates that on the question whether detention is "lawful", including whether it complies with "a procedure prescribed by law" within the meaning of Article 5 § 1, the Convention refers back essentially to national law, including rules of public international law applicable in the State concerned (see, mutatis mutandis, Groppera Radio AG and Others v. Switzerland, 28 March 1990, Series A no. 173, § 68; Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, §§ 83, 90, ECHR 2005-IV; and Weber and Saravia v. Germany (dec.), no. 54934/00, § 87, 29 June 2006).
• EGMR, 29.06.2006 - 54934/00

  Menschenrechte: Verletzung der Privatsphäre und des Briefgeheimnisses durch das …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  The Court reiterates that on the question whether detention is "lawful", including whether it complies with "a procedure prescribed by law" within the meaning of Article 5 § 1, the Convention refers back essentially to national law, including rules of public international law applicable in the State concerned (see, mutatis mutandis, Groppera Radio AG and Others v. Switzerland, 28 March 1990, Series A no. 173, § 68; Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, §§ 83, 90, ECHR 2005-IV; and Weber and Saravia v. Germany (dec.), no. 54934/00, § 87, 29 June 2006).
• EGMR, 18.12.1986 - 9990/82

  BOZANO v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 44853/10

  However, since under Article 5 § 1 failure to comply with domestic law entails a breach of the Convention, it follows that the Court can and should exercise a certain power to review whether this law has been complied with (see Bozano v. France, 18 December 1986, Series A no. 111, § 58; and Öcalan, cited above, § 84).
• EGMR, 17.12.2002 - 21287/02

  PRYSTAVSKA contre l'UKRAINE

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 06.07.2015 - C-237/15

  Lanigan

  Vgl. insoweit EGMR, Soldatenko/Ukraine, 23. Oktober 2008, Nr. 2440/07, § 112, sowie Toniolo/San Marino und Italien, 26. Juni 2012, Nr. 44853/10, § 46.

  65 - EKMR, X./Vereinigtes Königreich, 21. Mai 1976, Nr. 6565/74, D. R. 5, S. 55 f., EGMR, Medvedyev u. a./Frankreich, Nr. 3394/03, EGMR 2010, § 79, sowie Toniolo/San Marino und Italien, 26. Juni 2012, Nr. 44853/10, § 44.

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 27.10.2016 - C-640/15

  Vilkas

  23 - Urteil des EGMR vom 26. Juni 2012, Toniolo/San Marino und Italien (CE:ECHR:2012:0626JUD004485310, Rn. 44).

  27 - Urteile des EGMR vom 23. Oktober 2008, Soldatenko/Ukraine (…CE:ECHR:2008:1023JUD000244007, Rn. 112), und vom 26. Juni 2012, Toniolo/San Marino und Italien (CE:ECHR:2012:0626JUD004485310, Rn. 46 bis 50).