Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M. AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 13, Art. 41, Art. 46, Art. 46 Abs. 2 MRK
  Violation of Art. 5-1 Violation of Art. 5-4 Violation of Art. 8 (in case of expulsion to Afghanistan) Violation of Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M. AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] by the Austrian Institute for Human Rights (ÖIM)

  [DEU] Violation of Art. 5-1;Violation of Art. 5-4;Violation of Art. 8 (in case of expulsion to Afghanistan);Violation of Art. 13;Non-pecuniary damage - award

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  M. and Others v. Bulgaria

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (17)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 26.07.2005 - 38885/02

  N. v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 41416/08

  In these circumstances, there is no need to examine whether Mr M."s deportation would also violate another Convention provision (see Hilal v. the United Kingdom, no. 45276/99, § 71, ECHR 2001-II; Daoudi v. France, no. 19576/08, § 78, 3 December 2009; and N. v. Finland, no. 38885/02, § 173, 26 July 2005) and it is no longer necessary to maintain the measures taken under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.

  First, it seems to place excessive reliance on the question whether the ill-treatment risked in the receiving State would emanate from State or non-State sources, whereas, in accordance with the Court's established case-law, this issue, albeit relevant, cannot be decisive (see, among others, N. v. Finland, no. 38885/02, §§ 163-165, 26 July 2005, and Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, §§ 137-149, ECHR 2007-I).

• EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 1948/04

  Somalia, Abschiebungshindernis, zielstaatsbezogene Abschiebungshindernisse, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 41416/08

  First, it seems to place excessive reliance on the question whether the ill-treatment risked in the receiving State would emanate from State or non-State sources, whereas, in accordance with the Court's established case-law, this issue, albeit relevant, cannot be decisive (see, among others, N. v. Finland, no. 38885/02, §§ 163-165, 26 July 2005, and Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, §§ 137-149, ECHR 2007-I).
• EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 45276/99

  Tansania, CUF, Civic United Front, Oppositionelle, Inhaftierung, Folter, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 41416/08

  In these circumstances, there is no need to examine whether Mr M."s deportation would also violate another Convention provision (see Hilal v. the United Kingdom, no. 45276/99, § 71, ECHR 2001-II; Daoudi v. France, no. 19576/08, § 78, 3 December 2009; and N. v. Finland, no. 38885/02, § 173, 26 July 2005) and it is no longer necessary to maintain the measures taken under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.

 
• EGMR, 24.09.1992 - 11613/85

  KOLOMPAR c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 41416/08

  The above distinguishes the present case from the situation that obtained in, for example, Chahal (cited above) and Kolompar v. Belgium (24 September 1992, § 40, Series A no. 235-C).
• EGMR, 05.02.2002 - 51564/99

  Belgien, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, Abschiebunghaft, Freiheit …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 41416/08

  Consequently, it is inconsistent with Article 13 for such measures to be executed before the national authorities have examined whether they are compatible with the Convention, although Contracting States are afforded some discretion as to the manner in which they conform to their obligations under this provision (see Conka v. Belgium, no. 51564/99, § 79, ECHR 2002-I, and Salah Sheekh, cited above, § 153).
• EGMR, 17.02.2004 - 39748/98

  MAESTRI c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 41416/08

  Furthermore, it follows from the Convention, and from Article 1 in particular, that in ratifying the Convention the Contracting States undertake to ensure that their domestic legislation is compatible with it (see Maestri v. Italy [GC], no. 39748/98, § 47, ECHR 2004-I).
• EGMR, 26.11.2009 - 8256/07

  TABESH c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 41416/08

  If such proceedings are not prosecuted with due diligence, the detention will cease to be permissible under Article 5 § 1 (f) (see Chahal v. the United Kingdom, 15 November 1996, § 113, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-V; A. and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 3455/05, § 164, ECHR 2009-...; Tabesh v. Greece, no. 8256/07, §§ 56 and 57, 26 November 2009; and Raza, cited above, § 72).
• EGMR, 03.12.2009 - 19576/08

  DAOUDI c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 41416/08

  In these circumstances, there is no need to examine whether Mr M."s deportation would also violate another Convention provision (see Hilal v. the United Kingdom, no. 45276/99, § 71, ECHR 2001-II; Daoudi v. France, no. 19576/08, § 78, 3 December 2009; and N. v. Finland, no. 38885/02, § 173, 26 July 2005) and it is no longer necessary to maintain the measures taken under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.

• EGMR, 23.03.2016 - 43611/11

  F.G. v. SWEDEN

  In any event, the Court considers that its finding of the present judgment constitutes in itself sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicant (see, to this effect, Tarakhel v. Switzerland [GC], no. 29217/12, § 137, ECHR 2014 (extracts); Beldjoudi v. France, 26 March 1992, §§ 79 and 86, Series A no. 234-A; M. and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 41416/08, §§ 105 and 143, 26 July 2011; and Nizamov and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 07.11.2013 - 29381/09

  Homosexualität in Griechenland

  Dudgeon, précité, §§ 41 et 63 ; Johnston et autres, précité, § 42 ; Norris, précité, § 38, ou Manoussakis et autres c. Grèce, 26 septembre 1996, § 45, Recueil 1996-IV. Dans certaines affaires, la Cour détaille avec un soin particulier les mesures législatives à prendre (M. et autres c. Bulgarie, no 41416/08, § 138, 26 juillet 2011).
• EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 34016/18

  O.D. ./. Bulgarien - Abschiebung nach Syrien würde gegen Folterverbot verstoßen

  Le Gouvernement renvoie à cet égard à une série d'arrêts constatant une violation de cette disposition, en combinaison avec l'article 8, ainsi qu'à l'arrêt M. et autres c. Bulgarie, dans lequel la Cour a conclu à la violation de l'article 13, examiné ensemble avec l'article 3 (no 41416/08, 26 juillet 2011).

 
• EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 2944/06

  ASLAKHANOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  30562/04 and 30566/04, § 134, ECHR 2008...; and M. and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 41416/08, § 136, 26 July 2011).
• EGMR, 20.12.2011 - 10486/10

  YOH-EKALE MWANJE c. BELGIQUE

  La Cour rappelle que compte tenu de l'importance qu'elle attache à l'article 3 et de la nature irréversible du dommage susceptible d'être causé en cas de réalisation du risque de torture ou de mauvais traitements, l'effectivité d'un recours au sens de l'article 13 exige un examen indépendant et rigoureux de tout grief aux termes duquel il existe des motifs de croire à un risque de traitement contraire à l'article 3 et implique, sous réserve d'une certaine marge d'appréciation des Etats, que l'organe compétent puisse examiner le contenu du grief et offrir un redressement approprié (Jabari c. Turquie, no 40035/98, §§ 48 et 50, CEDH 2000-VIII, M.S.S. précité, §§ 293 et 387, M. et autres c. Bulgarie, no 41416/08, § 127, 26 juillet 2011).
• VG Oldenburg, 10.09.2012 - 5 A 1245/11

  Abschiebungsschutz; EMRK, 1. Zusatzprotokoll; Gesundheitsvorsorge; …

  Entsprechendes gilt für die im Urteil des EGMR vom 26. Juli 2011 (Beschw.Nr. 41416/08) beanstandete Verfahrenspraxis des bulgarischen Obersten Verwaltungsgerichts im Fall von afghanischen Asylbewerbern.
• EGMR, 27.10.2020 - 19656/18

  M.A. c. BELGIQUE

  La Cour rappelle toutefois sa jurisprudence constante selon laquelle, en vertu de l'article 5 § 1 f) de la Convention, il importe peu que la décision d'expulsion sous-jacente puisse être justifiée au regard du droit interne ou de la Convention (voir Chahal c. Royaume-Uni, 15 novembre 1996, § 112, Recueil 1996-V, M. et autres c. Bulgarie, no 41416/08, § 63, 26 juillet 2011, et plus récemment, Kahadawa Arachchige et autres c. Chypre, nos 16870/11 et 2 autres, § 58, 19 juin 2018).
• EGMR, 15.04.2014 - 43875/09

  ASALYA v. TURKEY

  It is, therefore, inconsistent with Article 13 for such measures to be executed before the national authorities have examined their compatibility with the Convention (see M. and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 41416/08, § 129, 26 July 2011; Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, § 153, 11 January 2007; and Conka v. Belgium, no. 51564/99, § 79, ECHR 2002-I).
• EGMR, 18.06.2020 - 42779/12

  NUR AHMED AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  It can be said, therefore, that, during that first period of detention, action was being taken against the applicants with a view to deportation (see, mutatis mutandis, A. and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 3455/05, § 168, ECHR 2009, and L.M. and Others v. Russia, nos. 40081/14 and 2 others, § 147, 15 October 2015, and contrast cases where the applicants were detained for considerable periods of time, considerably longer than in the present case, while the authorities did not pursue their efforts to obtain travel documents from them with requisite diligence: Singh v. the Czech Republic, no. 60538/00, §§ 62-68, 25 January 2005 (where detention in such circumstances lasted for two and a half years); Mikolenko v. Estonia, no. 10664/05, §§ 64-68, 8 October 2009 (three years and eleven months); Raza v. Bulgaria, no. 31465/08, §§ 73-75, 11 February 2010 (more than two and a half years); and M. and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 41416/08, §§ 71-75, 26 July 2011 (two years and nine months)).
• EGMR, 08.06.2017 - 75832/13

  M.M. c. BULGARIE

  S'agissant plus particulièrement du grief du requérant relatif à l'efficacité des recours existant en droit bulgare et à l'absence d'effet suspensif de ces recours, la Cour observe qu'elle a déjà examiné de tels griefs dans de précédentes affaires dans lesquelles elle a constaté la violation de l'article 13 combiné avec l'article 3 de la Convention (M. et autres c. Bulgarie, no 41416/08, §§ 124-133, 26 juillet 2011, et Auad, précité, §§ 117-123).
• VG Oldenburg, 10.09.2012 - 5 A 1482/11

  Abschiebungsschutz; EMRK, 1. Zusatzprotokoll; Gesundheitsversorgung; …
• EGMR, 17.05.2022 - 35422/16

  ALI REZA c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 12.03.2013 - 31206/05

  DJALTI c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 12.07.2023 - 29259/21

  B.Y. c. BULGARIE
• EGMR, 16.07.2020 - 77647/11

  NUR AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 22.07.2014 - 22681/09

  A.D. AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 26.04.2012 - 12275/10

  MOLOTCHKO v. UKRAINE