Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 30.09.2021 - 9146/20, 28758/20 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2021,39312) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SHESTUN v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Speediness of review) (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (2)
- EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08
CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 30.09.2021 - 9146/20
It thus considers that this complaint is admissible but that there is no need to give a separate ruling it (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014). - EGMR, 01.06.2006 - 7064/05
MAMEDOVA v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 30.09.2021 - 9146/20
Where an individual's personal liberty is at stake, the Court has very strict standards concerning the State's compliance with the requirement of speedy review of the lawfulness of detention (see, for example, Kadem v. Malta, no. 55263/00, §§ 44-45, 9 January 2003, where the Court considered a time period of seventeen days in deciding on the lawfulness of the applicant's detention to be excessive, and Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, § 96, 1 June 2006, where the length of appeal proceedings lasting, inter alia, twenty-six days, was found to be in breach of the "speediness" requirement of Article 5 § 4).
- EGMR, 31.03.2022 - 26627/05
KARIMBAYEV v. RUSSIA
It thus considers that the applicant's complaint is admissible but that there is no need to give a separate ruling on the complaint under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014, and, most recently, Shestun v. Russia [Committee], nos. 9146/20 and 28758/20, § 14, 30 September 2021).