Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VALERIY LOPATA v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing Article 6-3-c - Defence in person) ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EGMR, 23.09.2003 - 63356/00

  KERR v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  In the latter connection, they referred to the cases of Antoine v. the United Kingdom ((dec.), no. 62960/00, ECHR 2003-...) and Kerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 63356/00, 23 September 2003) and maintained that the procedure under section 4A of the 1964 Act was similar in operation to the procedure in the case at hand.
• EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95

  PEERS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov, cited above, §§ 97; and Ananyev v. Russia, no. 20292/04, §§ 121-66, 30 July 2009).
• EGMR, 20.01.2005 - 63378/00

  MAYZIT v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov, cited above, §§ 97; and Ananyev v. Russia, no. 20292/04, §§ 121-66, 30 July 2009).

 
• EGMR, 13.05.2003 - 62960/00

  ANTOINE contre le ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  In the latter connection, they referred to the cases of Antoine v. the United Kingdom ((dec.), no. 62960/00, ECHR 2003-...) and Kerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 63356/00, 23 September 2003) and maintained that the procedure under section 4A of the 1964 Act was similar in operation to the procedure in the case at hand.
• EGMR, 18.05.1999 - 28972/95

  NINN-HANSEN c. DANEMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  The Court reiterates further that the trial court may exceptionally continue hearings where the accused is absent on account of illness, provided that his or her interests are sufficiently protected (see Ninn-Hansen v. Denmark (dec.), no. 28972/95, p. 351, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 09.04.1984 - 8966/80

  GODDI v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  The State is under an obligation to secure the attendance of an accused who is in custody (see, mutatis mutandis, Goddi v. Italy, 9 April 1984, § 29, Series A no. 76).
• EGMR, 21.09.1993 - 12350/86

  KREMZOW v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  However, where proceedings involve an assessment of the personality and character of the accused and his state of mind at the time of the offence and where their outcome could be of major detriment to him, it is essential to the fairness of the proceedings that he be present at the hearing and afforded the opportunity to participate in it together with his counsel (see Kremzow v. Austria, 21 September 1993, § 67, Series A no. 268-B; Zana v. Turkey, 25 November 1997, §§ 71-73, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VII; and Pobornikoff v. Austria, no. 28501/95, § 31, 3 October 2000).
• EGMR, 28.08.1991 - 12151/86

  F.C.B. c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  In this context, authorities must show requisite diligence in ensuring the accused's right to be present in an effective manner and must act particularly carefully when infringing upon that right, so as not to place the mentally ill at a disadvantage when compared with other defendants who do enjoy such a right (see, mutatis mutandis, F.C.B. v. Italy, 28 August 1991, § 33, Series A no. 208-B).
• EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 20292/04

  ANANYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov, cited above, §§ 97; and Ananyev v. Russia, no. 20292/04, §§ 121-66, 30 July 2009).
• EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 62208/00

  LABZOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 19936/04

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of a lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, §§ 69 et seq., ECHR 2001-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 104 et seq., ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, §§ 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, §§ 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; Kalashnikov, cited above, §§ 97; and Ananyev v. Russia, no. 20292/04, §§ 121-66, 30 July 2009).
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

  KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 66460/01

  NOVOSELOV v. RUSSIA