Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 28.11.2013 - 20403/05 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2013,33703) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
TARAKANOV v. RUSSIA
Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c MRK
Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1-c - Bringing before competent legal authority) (englisch)
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Tarakanov v. Russia
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 28358/95
BARANOWSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2013 - 20403/05
It is therefore essential that the conditions for deprivation of liberty under domestic law be clearly defined and that the law itself be foreseeable in its application, so that it meets the standard of "lawfulness" set by the Convention, a standard which requires that all law be sufficiently precise to allow a person - if need be with appropriate advice - to foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action may entail (see Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX, and Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III). - EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97
JECIUS v. LITHUANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2013 - 20403/05
It is therefore essential that the conditions for deprivation of liberty under domestic law be clearly defined and that the law itself be foreseeable in its application, so that it meets the standard of "lawfulness" set by the Convention, a standard which requires that all law be sufficiently precise to allow a person - if need be with appropriate advice - to foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action may entail (see Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX, and Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III). - EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 21731/02
SHCHEBETOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2013 - 20403/05
The mere fact that the outcome of the proceedings was not favourable to the applicant does not render this remedy ineffective (see Amann v. Switzerland [GC], no. 27798/95, § 89, ECHR 2000-II; Shchebetov v. Russia, no. 21731/02, § 91, 10 April 2012, with further references). - EGMR, 16.02.2000 - 27798/95
AMANN c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.11.2013 - 20403/05
The mere fact that the outcome of the proceedings was not favourable to the applicant does not render this remedy ineffective (see Amann v. Switzerland [GC], no. 27798/95, § 89, ECHR 2000-II; Shchebetov v. Russia, no. 21731/02, § 91, 10 April 2012, with further references).