Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  STEPAN ZIMIN v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article ...

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13

  KOVYAZIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

  The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 165, 31 May 2011; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13, 60882/12 and 53390/13, § 71, 17 September 2015).
• EGMR, 15.05.2014 - 19554/05

  TARANENKO v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

  The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 165, 31 May 2011; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13, 60882/12 and 53390/13, § 71, 17 September 2015).
• EGMR, 25.04.2013 - 71386/10

  SAVRIDDIN DZHURAYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

  The obligation to comply with the present judgment would thus require the adoption of other measures in addition to the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court, which is only designed to make reparation for such consequences of a violation that cannot otherwise be remedied (see Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 71386/10, § 252, ECHR 2013 (extracts).

 
• EGMR, 21.02.2006 - 50959/99

  ODABASI ET KOÇAK c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

  In this context, the Court reiterates that while the respondent State in principle remains free to choose the means by which it will comply with this obligation, it is for the Committee of Ministers to assess whether those means are compatible with the conclusions set out in the Court's judgment and consistent with the approach adopted by the Convention organs in similar cases (see, for example, Maestri v. Italy [GC], no. 39748/98, § 47, ECHR 2004-I, and the Resolution of the Committee of Ministers ResDH(2010)63 of 3 June 2010 on the execution of the judgment in Odabasi and Koçak v. Turkey, no. 50959/99, 21 February 2006).
• EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 39221/98

  SCOZZARI ET GIUNTA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

  It will be thus for the respondent State to take appropriate measures to redress the effects of any past or future damage for the applicant as a result of his disproportionate sentencing which the Court has found to be in breach of the Convention (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII).
• EGMR, 17.02.2004 - 39748/98

  MAESTRI c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

  In this context, the Court reiterates that while the respondent State in principle remains free to choose the means by which it will comply with this obligation, it is for the Committee of Ministers to assess whether those means are compatible with the conclusions set out in the Court's judgment and consistent with the approach adopted by the Convention organs in similar cases (see, for example, Maestri v. Italy [GC], no. 39748/98, § 47, ECHR 2004-I, and the Resolution of the Committee of Ministers ResDH(2010)63 of 3 June 2010 on the execution of the judgment in Odabasi and Koçak v. Turkey, no. 50959/99, 21 February 2006).
• EGMR, 31.05.2011 - 5829/04

  Russland wegen Chodorkowski verurteilt

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

  The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 165, 31 May 2011; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13, 60882/12 and 53390/13, § 71, 17 September 2015).
• EGMR - 43441/08 (anhängig)

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

  Furthermore, the Court has previously accepted that no remedy was available to applicants in relation to courtroom arrangements and that the six-month time-limit should be calculated from the date the alleged ill-treatment ceased (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, § 87, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).

• EGMR, 22.11.2022 - 48694/10

  ÇIÇEK ET AUTRES c. TÜRKIYE

  Dans un certain nombre d'affaires où était en cause un rassemblement sur la place Bolotnaïa de Moscou, la Cour a constaté que celui-ci tombait sous l'empire de l'article 11 de la Convention et elle a admis que les requérants pouvaient prétendre à la protection de cette disposition au motif qu'ils ne figuraient pas parmi les responsables des premières agressions ayant contribué à la détérioration du caractère pacifique du rassemblement (voir, entre autres, Yaroslav Belousov c. Russie, nos 2653/13 et 60980/14, § 172, 4 octobre 2016, Stepan Zimin c. Russie, nos 63686/13 et 60894/14, § 72, 30 janvier 2018, et Lutskevich c. Russie, nos 6312/13 et 60902/14, § 94, 15 mai 2018).
• EGMR, 16.10.2018 - 2335/09

  TKACHUK c. RUSSIE

  Eu égard à la durée considérable de cette période et à la présomption en faveur d'une libération, la Cour estime que les juridictions internes devaient invoquer des motifs convaincants pour prolonger la détention de l'intéressé (Stepan Zimin c. Russie, no 63686/13, 60894/14, § 55, 30 janvier 2018).
• EGMR, 05.02.2019 - 45767/09

  UTVENKO ET BORISOV c. RUSSIE

  Eu égard à la durée considérable de cette période et à la présomption en faveur d'une libération, la Cour estime que les juridictions internes devaient invoquer des motifs convaincants pour prolonger la détention de l'intéressé (Stepan Zimin c. Russie, no 63686/13, 60894/14, § 55, 30 janvier 2018).
• EGMR, 09.07.2019 - 40834/11

  KALINICHENKO c. RUSSIE

  Eu égard à la durée considérable de cette période et à la présomption en faveur d'une libération, la Cour estime que les juridictions internes devaient invoquer des motifs convaincants pour prolonger la détention de l'intéressé (Stepan Zimin c. Russie, no 63686/13, 60894/14, § 55, 30 janvier 2018).
• EGMR - 74141/10 (anhängig)

  IZMESTYEV c. RUSSIE

  Eu égard à la durée considérable de cette période et à la présomption en faveur d'une libération, la Cour estime que les juridictions internes devaient invoquer des motifs convaincants pour prolonger la détention de l'intéressé (Stepan Zimin c. Russie, nos 63686/13, 60894/14, § 55, 30 janvier 2018).