Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ALEKHIN v. RUSSIA

  (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Neu Zitiert selbst (22)

• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  It prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances and the victim's behaviour (see, among other authorities, Labita v. Italy [GC], no 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).

  Where such grounds are found to have been "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 152 and 153, ECHR 2000-IV).

• EGMR, 25.10.2005 - 5140/02

  FEDOTOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  The Court reiterates that Article 5 § 5 is complied with where it is possible to apply for compensation in respect of a deprivation of liberty effected in conditions contrary to paragraphs 1, 2, 3 or 4. The right to compensation set forth in paragraph 5 therefore presupposes that a violation of one of the preceding paragraphs of Article 5 has been established, either by a domestic authority or by the Court (see Fedotov v. Russia, no. 5140/02, § 83, 25 October 2005, and N.C. v. Italy [GC], no. 24952/94, § 49, ECHR 2002-X).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  Consequently, Article 13 is not engaged (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, § 52).

 
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  However, this provision does require the State to ensure that prisoners are detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject them to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, their health and well-being are adequately secured by, among other things, providing them with the requisite medical assistance (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 92-94, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 28.11.2000 - 29462/95

  REHBOCK c. SLOVENIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  The Court considers that that delay, which was attributable to the authorities, cannot be considered compatible with the "speediness" requirement of Article 5 § 4 (compare, for example, Rehbock v. Slovenia, no. 29462/95, §§ 85-86, ECHR 2000-XII, where the review proceedings, which lasted twenty-three days, were found not to be "speedy"; and Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, § 96, 1 June 2006; where the appeal proceedings lasted thirty-six, twenty-six, thirty-six, and twenty-nine days).
• EGMR, 21.12.2000 - 33492/96

  JABLONSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  A person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify his or her continued detention (see, among other authorities, Castravet v. Moldova, no. 23393/05, §§ 30 and 32, 13 March 2007; McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 41, ECHR 2006-...; Jablonski v. Poland, no. 33492/96, § 83, 21 December 2000; and Neumeister v. Austria, 27 June 1968, § 4, Series A no. 8).
• EGMR, 29.05.2001 - 63716/00

  SAWONIUK contre le ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  Whether the severity of the ill-treatment or neglect reaches the threshold prohibited by Article 3 will depend on the particular circumstances of the case, including the age and state of health of the person concerned as well as the duration and nature of the treatment and its physical or mental effects (see Sawoniuk v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 63716/00, 29 May 2001).
• EGMR, 07.06.2001 - 64666/01

  PAPON v. FRANCE (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  The Court has already had occasion to note that, under certain circumstances, the detention of an elderly or severely disabled person over a lengthy period and in conditions inappropriate to his or her state of health might raise an issue under Article 3 (see Papon c. France (dec.), no. 64666/01, 7 June 2001; Price v. the United Kingdom, no. 33394/96, §§ 21 to 30, ECHR 2001-VII; and Farbtuhs v. Latvia, no. 4672/02, § 53, 2 December 2004).
• EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 33394/96

  PRICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  The Court has already had occasion to note that, under certain circumstances, the detention of an elderly or severely disabled person over a lengthy period and in conditions inappropriate to his or her state of health might raise an issue under Article 3 (see Papon c. France (dec.), no. 64666/01, 7 June 2001; Price v. the United Kingdom, no. 33394/96, §§ 21 to 30, ECHR 2001-VII; and Farbtuhs v. Latvia, no. 4672/02, § 53, 2 December 2004).
• EGMR, 24.07.2001 - 44558/98

  VALASINAS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 10638/08

  However, to fall under Article 3 of the Convention, ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity (see Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, §§ 100-101, ECHR 2001-VIII).
• EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 38822/97

  Recht auf Freiheit und Sicherheit (zur Wahrnehmung richterlicher Aufgaben …
• EGMR, 14.12.2004 - 25875/03

  GELFMANN c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

  KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 01.06.2006 - 7064/05

  MAMEDOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 14.12.2006 - 4353/03

  TARARIEVA c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 16.01.2007 - 27561/02

  SOLMAZ c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 23393/05

  CASTRAVET v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 12.06.2008 - 78146/01

  VLASOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 31.07.2008 - 42239/02

  STAROKADOMSKIY v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 09.10.2008 - 62936/00

  MOISEYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

  Neumeister ./. Österreich

• EGMR, 11.04.2024 - 19134/22

  NAUMENKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), concerning detention in a metal cage during court hearings; Alekhin v. Russia, no. 10638/08, §§ 146-155, 30 July 2009, related to the lack of an enforceable right to compensation for detention which has been found to be in violation of Article 5 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention; Fortalnov and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 01.02.2024 - 36904/19

  BUTYANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Alekhin v. Russia, no. 10638/08, §§ 146-55, 30 July 2009, regarding lack of, or inadequate, compensation in relation to the excessive length of pre-trial detention and review of detention; Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 30.07.2020 - 10179/05

  DIKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in its case-law (Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), as regards placement of applicants in metal cages during hearings in court rooms; Idalov v. Russia [GC], cited above, concerning lack of speedy review of detention matters; and Alekhin v. Russia, no. 10638/08, 30 July 2009, regarding lack of, or inadequate, compensation in relation to the excessive length of pre-trial detention and to a delay in examination of an appeal against an extension order, as required by Article 5 § 5 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 5 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention).

  5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate, compensation in conjunction with Article 5 (1) and Article 5 (4) of the Convention - in particular, lack of compensation for unlawful arrest or detention in relation to the excessive length of pre-trial detention and to a delay in examination of an appeal against an extension order (see Alekhin v. Russia, no. 10638/08, §§ 148-155, 30 July 2009);.

 
• EGMR, 11.01.2024 - 56727/18

  KAYUMOVY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its well-established case-law (see Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, §§ 103-08 and 154-58, 22 May 2012, concerning inadequate conditions of transport and lengthy review of detention; Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), as regards placement in a metal cage during court hearings; Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, §§ 29-33, 18 February 2020, as regards the lack of an effective remedy in respect of the complaint about restrictions on family visits in pre-trial detention facilities, Chaldayev, cited above, §§ 69-83, related to discriminatory treatment as regards family visits in pre-trial detention facilities; and Alekhin v. Russia, no. 10638/08, §§ 146-55, 30 July 2009, regarding the lack of compensation in relation to a delay in examination of an appeal against an extension detention order).
• EGMR, 19.06.2018 - 61744/11

  N.G. c. RUSSIE

  Il se réfère enfin aux arrêts Bordikov c. Russie (no 921/03, 8 octobre 2009), Pitalev c. Russie (no 34393/03, 30 juillet 2009), Alekhin c. Russie (no 10638/08, 30 juillet 2009), et Khatayev c. Russie (no 56994/09, 11 octobre 2011) où la Cour n'a pas trouvé de violation de l'article 3 de la Convention concernant les soins administrés aux détenus ou a rejeté des griefs similaires pour défaut manifeste de fondement.
• EGMR, 15.12.2022 - 63440/19

  KHASAVOV v. RUSSIA

  32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), as regards detention in a metal cage during court hearings; and Alekhin v. Russia, no. 10638/08, §§ 146-55, 30 July 2009, concerning the lack of compensation in relation to the excessive length of pre-trial detention and to a delay in examination of an appeal against an extension order.
• EGMR, 28.07.2022 - 14878/19

  PAVLOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), concerning the use of metal cages during court hearings; Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, 22 May 2012, concerning lack of a speedy review of detention matters and poor conditions of transport of detainees; and Alekhin v. Russia, no. 10638/08, 30 July 2009, regarding lack of, or inadequate, compensation in relation to the excessive length of pre-trial detention).