Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  A.R. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. e, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73

  WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EKMR, 29.11.1995 - 25527/94

  The Commission recalls that the case-law of the Convention organs establishes that for detention on grounds of mental illness to be compatible with the above provision the existence of a medical disorder must be established by objective medical expertise, the disorder must be of such a kind or degree as to necessitate compulsory confinement and the validity of continued confinement depends on the persistence of such a disorder (see Winterwerp judgment of 24.10.79, Series A no. 33 p. 18 para. 39).

  1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention unless it is found that the detention had indirect effects on the detained persons right to administer his property or to carry out legal transactions (see eg. Eur. Court H.R., Neumeister judgment of 27 June 1968, Series A no. 8, p. 43, para. 23 and the Winterwerp judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, p. 28, para. 73 and the Wassink case, Comm. Report 12.7.89, para. 64, Eur. Court H.R., Series A no. 185, p. 27-28 para. 64).

• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

  Neumeister ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EKMR, 29.11.1995 - 25527/94

  1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention unless it is found that the detention had indirect effects on the detained persons right to administer his property or to carry out legal transactions (see eg. Eur. Court H.R., Neumeister judgment of 27 June 1968, Series A no. 8, p. 43, para. 23 and the Winterwerp judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, p. 28, para. 73 and the Wassink case, Comm. Report 12.7.89, para. 64, Eur. Court H.R., Series A no. 185, p. 27-28 para. 64).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 29.11.1995 - 25527/94

  It only applies if the individual can be said to have an "arguable claim" of a violation of the Convention (Eur. Court H.R., Boyle and Rice judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, p.23, para. 52).

• EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 30745/04

  GRIGORE c. ROUMANIE

  Dans ces conditions, le risque que la requérante soit appréhendée et réincarcérée ne semble pas purement théorique, bien qu'aucune mesure n'ait été prise à son encontre depuis dix ans (voir, a contrario, les affaires A.R. c. Royaume-Uni (déc.), no 25527/94, 29 novembre 1995, et E.M.B. c. Roumanie (déc.), no 4488/03, 28 septembre 2010, où les requérants n'ont jamais été privés de liberté).