Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NIKOVIC v. SWEDEN

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EKMR, 04.07.1995 - 25387/94

  KAS IBRAHIM ET PARSOM v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EKMR, 07.12.1995 - 28285/95

  Moreover, the Commission recalls that Chapter 8, Section 1 of the Aliens Act imposes an absolute obligation on the enforcement authority in Sweden to refrain from expelling an alien should the human rights situation in the receiving country constitute a firm reason to believe that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to capital or corporal punishment, or torture, in that country (cf. No. 25387/94, Kas Ibrahim and Parsom v. Sweden, Dec. 4.7.95, unpublished).
• EKMR, 14.09.1995 - 27249/95

  LWANGA AND SEMPUNGO v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EKMR, 07.12.1995 - 28285/95

  The Commission further notes that, should the applicant, who, apparently, is not undergoing psychiatric care at present, later be taken into compulsory psychiatric care due to his mental problems, the expulsion order could under no circumstances take place without the permission of the chief physician responsible for his care (cf. No. 27249/95, Lwanga and Sempungo v. Sweden, Dec. 14.9.95, D.R. 83-A).
• EGMR, 20.03.1991 - 15576/89

  CRUZ VARAS ET AUTRES c. SUÈDE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 07.12.1995 - 28285/95

  The assessment of this minimum is relative; it depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the nature and context of the treatment, the manner and method of its execution, its duration, its physical or mental effects and, in some instances, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (cf. Eur. Court H.R., Cruz Varas and Others judgment of 20 March 1991, Series A no. 201, p. 31, paras. 83-84).
• EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87

  VILVARAJAH ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 07.12.1995 - 28285/95

  The Commission recalls that Contracting States have the right to control the entry, residence and expulsion of aliens (cf., e.g., Eur. Court H.R., Vilvarajah and Others judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, p. 34, para. 102).

• EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 60286/09

  BALOGUN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  The Court recalls that in previous cases involving a risk of suicide, it has found not only that the high threshold for Article 3 applies to the same extent as it does in other types of cases, but that appropriate and adequate steps taken by the relevant authorities to mitigate a risk of suicide will weigh against a conclusion that the high threshold of Article 3 has been reached (see Nikovic v. Sweden, no. 28285/95, Commission decision of 7 December 1995, (DR)).