Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 30.05.2013 - 36673/04   

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/2013,11195
EGMR, 30.05.2013 - 36673/04 (https://dejure.org/2013,11195)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 30.05.2013 - 36673/04 (https://dejure.org/2013,11195)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 30. Mai 2013 - 36673/04 (https://dejure.org/2013,11195)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2013,11195) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    MALOFEYEVA v. RUSSIA

    Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. a, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 10, Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1 MRK
    Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-2 - Prompt information) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Speediness of review) Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings Article 6-1 - Public hearing) Article 6-3-a - Information on nature and cause of accusation Article 6-3-b - Adequate facilities Adequate time) Violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly) read in the light of Article 10 - (Art. 10) Freedom of expression -General (englisch)

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 ... (21)

  • EGMR, 20.09.2016 - 926/08

    KARELIN v. RUSSIA

    Having regard to its earlier case-law concerning administrative offences punishable by detention (see, among others, Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 99-100, 30 May 2013 and the Court's judgment in the Mikhaylova case (cited above)), the Court holds that the criminal limb of Article 6 of the Convention is applicable.
  • EGMR, 19.11.2015 - 46998/08

    MIKHAYLOVA v. RUSSIA

    A fortiori, the statutory sentence of administrative detention is a strong indication in favour of classifying the relevant domestic proceedings under the criminal limb of Article 6 of the Convention (see Menesheva, cited above, § 97, and Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, § 100, 30 May 2013).

    [8] See Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, § 73, 4 December 2014; Nemtsov v. Russia, no. 1774/11, §§ 76-77 and § 93, 31 July 2014; Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 117-118, 30 May 2013; and Makhmudov v. Russia, no. 35082/04, § 83, 26 July 2007.

  • EGMR, 07.02.2017 - 57818/09

    LASHMANKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    It was important for the public authorities to show a certain degree of tolerance towards peaceful gatherings if the freedom of assembly guaranteed by Article 11 of the Convention was not to be deprived of its substance (see Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, § 136, 30 May 2013).
  • EGMR, 05.01.2016 - 74568/12

    Russland verurteilt: 25.000 Euro wegen Festnahme nach Demo

    The Court has previously found that the offence set out in Article 19.3 of the Code of the Administrative Offences had to be classified as "criminal" for the purposes of the Convention in view of the gravity of the sanction and its purely punitive purpose (see Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 99-101, 30 May 2013; Nemtsov v. Russia, no. 1774/11, § 83, 31 July 2014; and Navalnyy and Yashin, cited above, § 78).
  • EGMR, 04.12.2014 - 76204/11

    NAVALNYY AND YASHIN v. RUSSIA

    In particular, where irregular demonstrators do not engage in acts of violence the Court has required that the public authorities show a certain degree of tolerance towards peaceful gatherings if the freedom of assembly guaranteed by Article 11 of the Convention is not to be deprived of all substance (ibid., § 42; see also see Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 34, ECHR 2007-III; Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 49, 24 July 2012; Berladir and Others v. Russia, no. 34202/06, § 38, 10 July 2012; Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 136-37, 30 May 2013, and Kasparov, cited above, § 91).
  • EGMR, 26.04.2016 - 25501/07

    NOVIKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    As submitted by the applicants, all their events were planned as solo static demonstrations, because that was the only form of public event not subject to comprehensive regulation under the Public Assemblies Act, first and foremost as regards the requirement of prior notification to the competent authority (see, among others, Berladir and Others v. Russia, no. 34202/06, §§ 26-62, 10 July 2012; Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 121-43, 30 May 2013; and Primov and Others, cited above, §§ 122-28).
  • EGMR, 11.02.2016 - 67360/11

    HUSEYNLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

    The issue of whether the time and facilities afforded to an accused were adequate must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of each particular case (see Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, § 112, 30 May 2013).
  • EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1774/11

    NEMTSOV v. RUSSIA

    It follows that Article 6 applies (see Menesheva, cited above, §§ 94-98; Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 99-101, 30 May 2013; and Kasparov, cited above, §§ 39-45).
  • EGMR, 10.04.2018 - 54381/08

    TSVETKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    However, where a person has already spent time in detention on the basis of a decision that contained a "gross and obvious irregularity", it can likely be concluded that the intervening period of detention was in breach of Article 5 § 1 (see for comparison Yefimenko v. Russia, no. 152/04, §§ 89-111, 12 February 2013, with further references; Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 91-95, 30 May 2013; Kleyn v. Russia, no. 44925/06, §§ 28-29, 5 January 2016; Hammerton v. the United Kingdom, no. 6287/10, §§ 112-17, 17 March 2016; and Gumeniuc v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 48829/06, §§ 25-26, 16 May 2017).
  • EGMR, 02.02.2017 - 29580/12

    NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA

    In particular, where irregular demonstrators do not engage in acts of violence the Court has required that the public authorities show a certain degree of tolerance towards peaceful gatherings if the freedom of assembly guaranteed by Article 11 of the Convention is not to be deprived of all substance (see Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, § 42, ECHR 2006-XIV; Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 34, ECHR 2007-III; Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 49, 24 July 2012; Berladir and Others v. Russia, no. 34202/06, § 38, 10 July 2012; Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, §§ 136-37, 30 May 2013; and Kasparov and Others, cited above, § 91).
  • EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 60259/11

    GAFGAZ MAMMADOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  • EGMR, 13.02.2018 - 5865/07

    BUTKEVICH v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 11.02.2016 - 69234/11

    IBRAHIMOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  • EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 51988/07

    KASPAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (No. 2)

  • EGMR, 31.01.2017 - 18232/11

    VAKHITOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 51269/07

    PÁKOZDI v. HUNGARY

  • EGMR, 02.05.2017 - 7389/09

    STOWARZYSZENIE WIETNAMCZYKÓW W POLSCE 'SOLIDARNOSC I PRZYJAZ?ƒ' v. POLAND

  • EGMR, 14.01.2014 - 40521/06

    GORBATENKO v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 66917/11 (anhängig)

    AGAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  • EGMR - 70090/10 (anhängig)

    TSERKOV YEVANGELSKIKH KHRISTIAN-BAPTISTOV AND PANASENKO v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR - 41830/15 (anhängig)

    ALIYEV 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