Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 46372/09   

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen.

Sie haben noch kein Nutzerkonto? In weniger als einer Minute ist es eingerichtet und Sie können sofort diese und weitere kostenlose Zusatzfunktionen nutzen.

| | Was ist die Merkfunktion?
Ablegen in
Benachrichtigen, wenn:




 
Alle auswählen
 

Zitiervorschläge

https://dejure.org/2011,55719
EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 46372/09 (https://dejure.org/2011,55719)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 26.07.2011 - 46372/09 (https://dejure.org/2011,55719)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 26. Juli 2011 - 46372/09 (https://dejure.org/2011,55719)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,55719) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

Sonstiges (2)

 
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 ... (11)

  • EGMR, 19.02.2015 - 75450/12

    M.S. v. CROATIA (NO. 2)

    That means that it does not suffice that the deprivation of liberty is in conformity with national law; it must also be necessary in the particular circumstances (see Witold Litwa v. Poland, no. 26629/95, § 78, ECHR 2000 III; Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 46, ECHR 2000-X; Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, § 42, 26 July 2011; Stanev, cited above, § 143; M. v. Ukraine, no. 2452/04, § 57, 19 April 2012; and Rudenko, cited above, § 103).
  • EGMR, 22.01.2013 - 33117/02

    LASHIN v. RUSSIA

    Secondly, the Court's case-law under Article 5 requires that any deprivation of liberty should be consistent with the purpose of Article 5, namely to protect individuals from arbitrariness (see Creanga v. Romania [GC], no. 29226/03, § 84, 23 February 2012; Herczegfalvy v. Austria, 24 September 1992, § 63, Series A no. 244; see also Venios v. Greece, no. 33055/08, §§ 48, 5 July 2011, and Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, §§ 40 et seq., 26 July 2011).
  • EGMR, 05.06.2018 - 51480/14

    SHAKULINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    The Court has also consistently held that Article 5 § 1 essentially refers to domestic law, but at the same time obliges national authorities to comply with the Convention requirements (see, among other authorities, Hutchison Reid v. the United Kingdom, no. 50272/99, § 47, ECHR 2003-IV, and Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, § 40, 26 July 2011).
  • EGMR, 02.05.2013 - 11737/06

    ZAGIDULINA v. RUSSIA

    The Court reiterates that essentially Article 5 § 1 refers to the domestic law, but at the same time obliges the national authorities to comply with the Convention requirements (see among other authorities Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, §§ 40-41, 26 July 2011, and Hutchison Reid v. the United Kingdom, no. 50272/99, § 47, ECHR 2003-IV).
  • EGMR, 18.06.2015 - 39317/05

    YAIKOV v. RUSSIA

    In this connection, an individual cannot be deprived of his liberty as being of "unsound mind" unless the following three minimum conditions are satisfied: firstly, he must reliably be shown to be of unsound mind; secondly, the mental disorder must be of a kind or degree warranting compulsory confinement (see Hutchison Reid v. the United Kingdom, no. 50272/99, § 52, ECHR 2003-IV); thirdly, the validity of continued confinement depends upon the persistence of such a disorder (see Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, 24 October 1979, § 39; Shtukaturov v. Russia, no. 44009/05, § 114, ECHR 2008; Varbanov v. Bulgaria, no. 31365/96, § 45, ECHR 2000-X and Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, § 41, 26 July 2011).
  • EGMR, 05.02.2015 - 5525/11

    MIFOBOVA v. RUSSIA

    The Court reiterates that essentially Article 5 § 1 refers to domestic law, but at the same time it obliges the national authorities to comply with the Convention requirements (see, among other authorities, Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, §§ 40-41, 26 July 2011, and Hutchison Reid v. the United Kingdom, no. 50272/99, § 47, ECHR 2003-IV).
  • EGMR, 12.06.2012 - 60593/10

    KORTESIS c. GRÈCE

    Elle rappelle ensuite que tout individu a droit à la protection de ce droit, c'est-à-dire à ne pas être ou rester privé de sa liberté (Weeks c. Royaume-Uni, 2 mars 1987, § 40, série A no 114), sauf si la privation en question respecte les exigences de l'article 5. La liste des exceptions au droit à la liberté que dresse l'article 5 § 1 revêt un caractère exhaustif (Labita c. Italie [GC], no 26772/95, § 170, CEDH 2000-IV, et Quinn c. France, 22 mars 1995, § 42, série A no 311), et seule une interprétation étroite cadre avec le but et l'objet de cette disposition: assurer que nul ne soit arbitrairement privé de sa liberté (Giulia Manzoni c. Italie, 1er juillet 1997, § 25, Recueil 1997-IV ; Hutchison Reid c. Royaume-Uni, no 50272/99, § 46, 20 février 2003 ; Karamanof c. Grèce, no 46372/09, § 40, 26 juillet 2011).
  • EGMR, 20.02.2018 - 3150/15

    X v. RUSSIA

    In that regard the Court reiterates that the detention of an individual is such a serious measure that it is only justified where other, less severe measures have been considered and found to be insufficient to safeguard the individual or public interest (see Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, § 42, 26 July 2011, with further references).
  • EGMR, 04.04.2017 - 9139/08

    V.K. v. RUSSIA

    In that regard the Court reiterates that the detention of an individual is such a serious measure that it is only justified where other, less severe measures have been considered and found to be insufficient to safeguard the individual or public interest (see Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, § 42, 26 July 2011, with further references).
  • EGMR, 06.12.2016 - 40979/04

    TRUTKO v. RUSSIA

    In this regard, the Court also reiterates that the detention of an individual is such a serious measure that it is only justified where other, less severe, measures have been considered and found to be insufficient to safeguard the individual or public interest which might require that the person concerned be detained (see Karamanof v. Greece, no. 46372/09, § 42, 26 July 2011 with further references).
  • EGMR, 11.10.2016 - 19129/13

    RUSLAN MAKAROV v. RUSSIA

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht