Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ANDRESAN v. ROMANIA

  Art. 3 MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Andresan v. Romania

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 26.07.2007 - 48254/99

  COBZARU v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 25783/03

  Nonetheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention the Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 32, Series A no. 336, and Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 283, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)) even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see Cobzaru v. Romania, no. 48254/99, § 65, 26 July 2007, as well as Ireland, cited above, § 161; Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; and Boicenco, cited above, § 104, on the standard of proof applied in such cases).
• EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94

  AVSAR c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 25783/03

  Nonetheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention the Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 32, Series A no. 336, and Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 283, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)) even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see Cobzaru v. Romania, no. 48254/99, § 65, 26 July 2007, as well as Ireland, cited above, § 161; Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; and Boicenco, cited above, § 104, on the standard of proof applied in such cases).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 25783/03

  Nonetheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention the Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 32, Series A no. 336, and Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 283, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)) even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see Cobzaru v. Romania, no. 48254/99, § 65, 26 July 2007, as well as Ireland, cited above, § 161; Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; and Boicenco, cited above, § 104, on the standard of proof applied in such cases).

 
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 25783/03

  Furthermore, where an individual raises an arguable claim that he has been seriously ill-treated by police or other agents of the State unlawfully and in breach of Article 3, that provision requires that there should be an effective official investigation capable of leading to the identification and, if need be, the punishment of those responsible (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V; Assenov and Others, cited above, § 102; and, mutatis mutandis, Velikova v. Bulgaria, no. 41488/98, § 70, ECHR 2000-VI).
• EGMR, 18.05.2000 - 41488/98

  VELIKOVA c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 25783/03

  Furthermore, where an individual raises an arguable claim that he has been seriously ill-treated by police or other agents of the State unlawfully and in breach of Article 3, that provision requires that there should be an effective official investigation capable of leading to the identification and, if need be, the punishment of those responsible (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 87, ECHR 1999-V; Assenov and Others, cited above, § 102; and, mutatis mutandis, Velikova v. Bulgaria, no. 41488/98, § 70, ECHR 2000-VI).
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95

  McKERR c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 25783/03

  The Court is sensitive to the subsidiary nature of its role and recognises that it must be cautious in taking on the role of a first-instance tribunal of fact, where this is not rendered unavoidable by the circumstances of a particular case (see, for example, McKerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 28883/95, 4 April 2000).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 25783/03

  Nonetheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention the Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 32, Series A no. 336, and Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 283, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)) even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see Cobzaru v. Romania, no. 48254/99, § 65, 26 July 2007, as well as Ireland, cited above, § 161; Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; and Boicenco, cited above, § 104, on the standard of proof applied in such cases).

• EGMR, 15.09.2015 - 40549/11

  POEDE c. ROUMANIE

  En l'absence d'une explication plausible à cet égard, la Cour ne voit aucune raison de donner la primauté à la version des agents de l'État sur celle du requérant, étayée par les témoignages susmentionnés (voir, mutatis mutandis, Archip c. Roumanie, no 49608/08, § 70, 27 septembre 2011, et Andresan c. Roumanie, no 25783/03, § 45, 30 octobre 2012).
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 49588/13

  SAVATIN c. ROUMANIE

  En l'absence d'une explication plausible pour l'ensemble des blessures subies par le requérant, la Cour ne voit aucune raison de donner la primauté à la version des agents de l'État sur celle du requérant (voir, mutatis mutandis, Archip c. Roumanie, no 49608/08, § 70, 27 septembre 2011, Andresan c. Roumanie, no 25783/03, § 45, 30 octobre 2012, et Poede c. Roumanie, no 40549/11, § 58, 15 septembre 2015).