Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  YERMAKOVICH v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment);No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Take proceedings);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  YERMAKOVICH v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 21.10.1986 - 9862/82

  SANCHEZ-REISSE c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 35237/14

  The question of whether the periods comply with the requirement must be determined in the light of the circumstances of each case (see Sanchez-Reisse v. Switzerland, 21 October 1986, § 55, Series A no. 107, and Oldham v. the United Kingdom, no. 36273/97, § 31, ECHR 2000-X).
• EGMR, 24.09.1992 - 10533/83

  HERCZEGFALVY c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 35237/14

  However, long intervals in the context of such an automatic periodic review may give rise to a violation of Article 5 § 4 (see, among other authorities, Herczegfalvy v. Austria, 24 September 1992, § 77, Series A no. 244).
• EGMR, 12.05.1992 - 13770/88

  MEGYERI c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 35237/14

  It is not out of the question for a system based on an automatic periodic review of the lawfulness of detention by a court to satisfy the requirements of Article 5 § 4 (see Megyeri v. Germany, 12 May 1992, § 22, Series A no. 237-A).

 
• EGMR, 26.09.2000 - 36273/97

  OLDHAM c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 35237/14

  The question of whether the periods comply with the requirement must be determined in the light of the circumstances of each case (see Sanchez-Reisse v. Switzerland, 21 October 1986, § 55, Series A no. 107, and Oldham v. the United Kingdom, no. 36273/97, § 31, ECHR 2000-X).
• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 42525/07

  ANANYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 35237/14

  In this connection, the Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding conditions of detention (see, for instance, Mursic v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 91-141, ECHR 2016; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 90-94, ECHR 2000-XI; and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 139-65, 10 January 2012).
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 48183/99

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 35237/14

  She had retained her Belorussian citizenship and, accordingly, was not left without an identity document necessary for her everyday life (contrast Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, §§ 95-100, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts)).
• EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 14743/11

  ABDULKHAKOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 35237/14

  The Court must, in particular, examine whether any new relevant factors that have arisen in the interval between periodic reviews have been assessed, without unreasonable delay, by a court having jurisdiction to decide whether or not the detention has become "unlawful" in the light of these new factors (see Abdulkhakov v. Russia, no. 14743/11, § 215, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 76136/12

  RAMADAN v. MALTA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 35237/14

  The Court reiterates that an arbitrary revocation of already obtained citizenship might in certain circumstances raise an issue under Article 8 of the Convention because of its impact on the private life of the individual (see, for example, Ramadan v. Malta, no. 76136/12, § 85, ECHR 2016 (extracts)).