Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08, 24592/10, 75186/11, 62510/12, 29330/15, 13123/16   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2022,16442
EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08, 24592/10, 75186/11, 62510/12, 29330/15, 13123/16 (https://dejure.org/2022,16442)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 05.07.2022 - 50942/08, 24592/10, 75186/11, 62510/12, 29330/15, 13123/16 (https://dejure.org/2022,16442)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 05. Juli 2022 - 50942/08, 24592/10, 75186/11, 62510/12, 29330/15, 13123/16 (https://dejure.org/2022,16442)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2022,16442) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    IVANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    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);Violation of Article 5 - Right to ...

Sonstiges

 
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 ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (21)

  • EGMR - 24592/10 (anhängig)

    KNYAZKINY v. RUSSIA and 4 other applications

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08
    Preliminary objections 3. In their additional observations and submissions on just satisfaction in the cases of Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no. 24592/10) and Mr I.Z. (no. 62510/12) the Government submitted for the first time that the applicants had failed to exhaust domestic remedies.

    Effectiveness of the investigation into the alleged ill-treatment 10. Firstly, the investigative authorities dismissed the credible allegations of ill-treatment by State officers in the cases of Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08), Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no. 24592/10), Mr Krysyuk (no.75186/11) and Mr Demerchyan (no. 29330/15) after summary pre-investigative inquiries.

    OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION UNDER THE WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 20. Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08), Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no.24592/10), Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11), Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no.13123/16) submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see Appendix II).

    OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION 21. Lastly, the Court has examined the remaining complaint under Article 6 of the Convention submitted by Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin (the first applicant in the case no. 24592/10) regarding the fairness of the criminal proceedings against him.

    Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no. 24592/10), made no claims regarding just satisfaction.

    Decides to join the applications; Declares Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin's (the first applicant in the case no. 24592/10) complaint under Article 6 of the Convention inadmissible and the remainder of the applications admissible; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention under its substantive and procedural limbs in respect of all of the applicants; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no. 13123/16); Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08) and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (the second applicant in the case no. 24592/10); Holds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11); Holds that the respondent State has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 34 of the Convention in the case of Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11); Holds that there is no need to examine the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention; Holds (a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in Appendix II, plus any tax that may be chargeable to them.

    24592/10.

    24592/10.

  • EGMR - 13123/16 (anhängig)

    PISKUNOVY v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08
    29330/15 and 13123/16 by a Committee;.

    Lastly, in the case of Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no. 13123/16) the investigative authorities opened criminal cases into the applicants' allegations in more than six months and one year respectively after the receipt of the applicants' first complaints.

    Having regard to the applicants' injuries confirmed by medical evidence, the Court concludes that the ill-treatment of Mr I.Z. (no. 62510/12), Mr Demerchyan (29330/15) and Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov (the first applicant in the case no. 13123/16) amounted to torture within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention.

    OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION UNDER THE WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 20. Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08), Mr Andrey Knyazkin (no.24592/10), Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11), Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no.13123/16) submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see Appendix II).

    Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08), Mr Demerchyan (no. 29330/15), Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no. 13123/16), also claimed costs and expenses.

    Decides to join the applications; Declares Mr Aleksandr Knyazkin's (the first applicant in the case no. 24592/10) complaint under Article 6 of the Convention inadmissible and the remainder of the applications admissible; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention under its substantive and procedural limbs in respect of all of the applicants; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Vyacheslav Piskunov and Mr Gennadiy Piskunov (no. 13123/16); Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of Mr Ivanov (no. 50942/08) and Mr Andrey Knyazkin (the second applicant in the case no. 24592/10); Holds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11); Holds that the respondent State has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 34 of the Convention in the case of Mr Krysyuk (no. 75186/11); Holds that there is no need to examine the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention; Holds (a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in Appendix II, plus any tax that may be chargeable to them.

    13123/16.

    13123/16.

  • EGMR, 26.11.2019 - 2991/06

    BELUGIN v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2022 - 50942/08
    7077/06 and 12 others, §§ 78-79, 26 June 2018; and Belugin v. Russia, no. 2991/06, §§ 69-71, 26 November 2019).

    Domestic courts failed to conduct a comprehensive review of his credible allegations in that regard (see Belugin v. Russia, no. 2991/06, § 71, 26 November 2019).

    Domestic courts failed to conduct a comprehensive review of his credible allegations in that regard (see Belugin v. Russia, no. 2991/06, § 71, 26 November 2019).

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht