Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MAINOV v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention) (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Zitiert selbst (7)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 44260/13

  KIM v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 11556/17

  For relevant provisions of the domestic law and practice, see Kim v. Russia, no. 44260/13, §§ 23-25, 17 July 2014.

  Nor can it be found that the cumulative effect of the other aspects of the detention which the applicant complained about reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhuman or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 (compare with the Court's findings in respect of the same detention facility at the relevant period of time, Mskhiladze v. Russia, no. 47741/16, §§ 38-39, 13 February 2018, and contrast with the Court's findings in respect of a previous period, Kim v. Russia, no. 44260/13, §§ 17-22, 31-35, 17 July 2014, and M.S.A. and Others v. Russia, no. 29957/14 and 8 others, § 58, 12 December 2017).

• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 42525/07

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 11556/17

  However, a significant change in the detention regime - such as a move from a communal cell to solitary confinement - has been held by the Court to put an end to the "continuous situation" (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 77-78, 10 January 2012, and Fetisov and Others v. Russia, nos. 43710/07 and 3 others, § 77 in fine, 17 January 2012).
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 43710/07

  FETISOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 11556/17

  However, a significant change in the detention regime - such as a move from a communal cell to solitary confinement - has been held by the Court to put an end to the "continuous situation" (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 77-78, 10 January 2012, and Fetisov and Others v. Russia, nos. 43710/07 and 3 others, § 77 in fine, 17 January 2012).

• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 1555/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 11556/17

  His detention in that cell must therefore be taken to constitute a distinct period that calls for a separate application of the six-month rule (see Zakharkin v. Russia, no. 1555/04, § 115, 10 June 2010).
• EGMR, 12.12.2017 - 29957/14

  SHEYKH ALI v. RUSSIA and 1 other application

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 11556/17

  Nor can it be found that the cumulative effect of the other aspects of the detention which the applicant complained about reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhuman or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 (compare with the Court's findings in respect of the same detention facility at the relevant period of time, Mskhiladze v. Russia, no. 47741/16, §§ 38-39, 13 February 2018, and contrast with the Court's findings in respect of a previous period, Kim v. Russia, no. 44260/13, §§ 17-22, 31-35, 17 July 2014, and M.S.A. and Others v. Russia, no. 29957/14 and 8 others, § 58, 12 December 2017).
• EGMR, 25.10.2016 - 43348/13

  CHKHIKVISHVILI v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 11556/17

  The authorities had not asked him to specify such a country or taken any steps to explore that option on their own initiative (contrast with Chkhikvishvili v. Russia, no. 43348/13, § 30, 25 October 2016).
• EGMR, 13.02.2018 - 47741/16

  MSKHILADZE v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 11556/17

  Nor can it be found that the cumulative effect of the other aspects of the detention which the applicant complained about reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhuman or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 (compare with the Court's findings in respect of the same detention facility at the relevant period of time, Mskhiladze v. Russia, no. 47741/16, §§ 38-39, 13 February 2018, and contrast with the Court's findings in respect of a previous period, Kim v. Russia, no. 44260/13, §§ 17-22, 31-35, 17 July 2014, and M.S.A. and Others v. Russia, no. 29957/14 and 8 others, § 58, 12 December 2017).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 38042/18

  A.K. v. RUSSIA and 1 other application

  It follows from this information provided by the applicant that he had at his disposal at least three square metres of personal space and that overcrowding, or any other aspect of the applicant's detention in those cells, does not appear to have constituted an issue according to the Court's case-law (see, within the context of detention on remand, Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, § 145, 10 January 2012 and, within the context of detention centre for foreigners, Mainov v. Russia [Committee] no. 11556/17, § 19, 15 May 2018 and Mardonshoyev v. Russia [Committee] no. 8279/16, § 19, 29 January 2019).
• EGMR, 13.09.2018 - 40667/17

  KHURTAK AND KOZYREV v. RUSSIA

  Nor can it be found that the cumulative effect of the other aspects of the detention which the applicant complained about reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhuman or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 (see Mainov v. Russia, no. 11556/17, § 19, 15 May 2018).
• EGMR, 03.07.2018 - 46601/16

  VAYEL v. RUSSIA

  Nor can it be found that the cumulative effect of the other aspects of the detention which the applicant complained about reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhuman or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 (see Mainov v. Russia, no. 11556/17, § 19, 15 May 2018).
• EGMR, 24.10.2019 - 8195/18

  ABZALOV v. RUSSIA

  Nor can it be found that the cumulative effect of the other aspects of the detention which the applicant complained about reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhuman or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 (see Mainov v. Russia, no. 11556/17, § 19, 15 May 2018).
• EGMR, 29.01.2019 - 8279/16

  MARDONSHOYEV v. RUSSIA

  As regards the subsequent period, the Court has been unable to find indications of a severe overcrowding or any other factors entailing a violation of Article 3 (see Mskhiladze v. Russia, no. 47741/16, §§ 38-39, 13 February 2018, and Mainov v. Russia, no. 11556/17, § 19, 15 May 2018).