Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  IVANOVA-SOKOLOVA v. BULGARIA (II)

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 10, Art. 13 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 07.06.2001 - 64666/01

  PAPON v. FRANCE (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.04.2008 - 26057/04

  Concerning the compatibility of the applicant's state of health with imprisonment, the Court notes that in the past it has been called upon to examine whether it is compatible with Article 3 for the following categories of persons to be detained in conditions which are not suitable in the light of their physical or mental condition: persons suffering from a mental disorder (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-XI; and Keenan v. the United Kingdom, no. 27229/95, ECHR 2001-III) or serious illness (see Mouisel, cited above; Matencio v. France, no. 58749/00, 15 January 2004; Sakkopoulos; and Melnik, both cited above), the disabled (see Price v. the United Kingdom, no. 33394/96, ECHR 2001-VII), the elderly (see Papon v. France (no. 1) (dec.), no. 64666/01, ECHR 2001-VI) or drug addicts suffering withdrawal symptoms (see McGlinchey and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 50390/99, ECHR 2003-V).
• EGMR, 14.11.2002 - 67263/01

  MOUISEL v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.04.2008 - 26057/04

  A summary of the Court's case-law under Article 3 concerning conditions of detention in general can be found in paragraph 95 of its judgment in the case of Kalashnikov v. Russia (no. 47095/99, ECHR 2002-VI) and the relevant principles relating to the conditions of detention of ill persons, the level of medical care to be given to such detainees, and the compatibility of their continued deprivation of liberty in a custodial setting with Article 3 have been summarised in paragraphs 38-40 of the Court's judgment in the case of Mouisel v. France (no. 67263/01, ECHR 2002-IX, with further references).
• EGMR, 15.01.2004 - 61828/00

  SAKKOPOULOS c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.04.2008 - 26057/04

  In examining such complaints, the Court has to review the detainee's state of health, the quality of the medical care which he or she receives, and the compatibility of his or her prolonged detention with his or her state of health (see Sakkopoulos v. Greece, no. 61828/00, § 39, 15 January 2004; and Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, § 94, 28 March 2006).

 
• EGMR, 14.12.2004 - 25875/03

  GELFMANN c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.04.2008 - 26057/04

  If the applicant's state of health worsens, it is open to her to make a fresh request for a suspension of her sentence under Article 447 § 3 of the 2005 Code of Criminal Procedure (see, mutatis mutandis, Gelfmann v. France, no. 25875/03, § 59, 14 December 2004; Ene v. Romania (dec.), no. 15110/05, 18 May 2006; and Bragadireanu v. Romania, no. 22088/04, § 90, 6 December 2007).
• EGMR, 28.03.2006 - 72286/01

  MELNIK v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.04.2008 - 26057/04

  In examining such complaints, the Court has to review the detainee's state of health, the quality of the medical care which he or she receives, and the compatibility of his or her prolonged detention with his or her state of health (see Sakkopoulos v. Greece, no. 61828/00, § 39, 15 January 2004; and Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, § 94, 28 March 2006).
• EGMR, 18.05.2006 - 15110/05

  ENE c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.04.2008 - 26057/04

  If the applicant's state of health worsens, it is open to her to make a fresh request for a suspension of her sentence under Article 447 § 3 of the 2005 Code of Criminal Procedure (see, mutatis mutandis, Gelfmann v. France, no. 25875/03, § 59, 14 December 2004; Ene v. Romania (dec.), no. 15110/05, 18 May 2006; and Bragadireanu v. Romania, no. 22088/04, § 90, 6 December 2007).
• EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 22088/04

  BRAGADIREANU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.04.2008 - 26057/04

  If the applicant's state of health worsens, it is open to her to make a fresh request for a suspension of her sentence under Article 447 § 3 of the 2005 Code of Criminal Procedure (see, mutatis mutandis, Gelfmann v. France, no. 25875/03, § 59, 14 December 2004; Ene v. Romania (dec.), no. 15110/05, 18 May 2006; and Bragadireanu v. Romania, no. 22088/04, § 90, 6 December 2007).