Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 03.07.2014 - 13255/07 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GEORGIA v. RUSSIA (I)
(englisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GÉORGIE c. RUSSIE (I)
(französisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GEORGIA v. RUSSIA (I) - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)
[DEU] Preliminary objection dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies);Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 38 - Examination of the case and friendly settlement proceedings;Violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 - Prohibition of collective ...
- juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)
Kurzfassungen/Presse (3)
- RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
- wolterskluwer-online.de (Kurzinformation)
Urteil im Verfahren Georgien gegen Russland I
- dw.de (Pressebericht, 03.07.2014)
Russland wegen Vertreibung verurteilt
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Videoaufzeichnung der mündlichen Verhandlung)
Georgia v. Russia (I)
[16.04.2009]
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 03.07.2014 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 31.01.2019 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 03.12.2020 - 13255/07
Papierfundstellen
- NVwZ 2015, 569
Wird zitiert von ... (22)
- EGMR, 20.10.2016 - 7334/13
MURSIC c. CROATIE
The Court would further note that different questions might arise in the context of single-occupancy accommodation, isolation or other similar detention regimes, or waiting rooms or similar spaces used for very short periods of time (such as police stations, psychiatric establishments, immigration detention facilities), which are however not in issue in the present case (see paragraph 50 above; and Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, §§ 192-205, ECHR 2014 (extracts)). - EGMR, 28.09.2015 - 23380/09
BOUYID v. BELGIUM
Even in the most difficult circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and organised crime, the Convention prohibits in absolute terms torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the conduct of the person concerned (see, among other authorities, Chahal v. the United Kingdom, 15 November 1996, § 79, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-V; and Labita, Gäfgen and El-Masri, all cited above; see also Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, § 192, ECHR 2014 (extracts); and Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos.The Court regularly reiterates that it is attentive to the seriousness attaching to a ruling that a Contracting State has violated fundamental rights (see, among other authorities, Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 147, ECHR 2005-VII; Mathew v. the Netherlands, no. 24919/03, § 156, ECHR 2005-IX; and Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, § 94, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).
- EGMR, 21.01.2021 - 38263/08
GEORGIA v. RUSSIA (II)
PRINCIPLES OF ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FACTS Principles of assessment of the evidence 59. The Court refers in this connection to the general principles which were recently summarised as follows in Georgia v. Russia (I) ([GC], no. 13255/07, ECHR 2014):.In this connection, it reiterates that "Article 41 of the Convention does, as such, apply to inter-State cases" (see Cyprus v. Turkey (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 25781/94, § 43, ECHR 2014), and it refers to the three criteria it has set out for establishing whether awarding just satisfaction was justified in an inter-State case: "(i) the type of complaint made by the applicant Government, which had to concern the violation of basic human rights of its nationals (or other victims); (ii) whether the victims could be identified; and (iii) the main purpose of bringing the proceedings" (see Georgia v. Russia (I) (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 13255/07, § 20, 29 January 2019).
My colleagues and I have had the privilege of sitting in the fourth inter-State case ever to be resolved on the merits by the Court (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, Series A no. 25; Cyprus v. Turkey [GC], no. 25781/94, ECHR 2001-IV; and Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).
- EGMR, 15.12.2016 - 16483/12
Lampedusa-Haft war illegal
The prohibition in question is absolute, for no derogation from it is permissible even in the event of a public emergency threatening the life of the nation or in the most difficult circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and organised crime, irrespective of the conduct of the person concerned (see, inter alia, Chahal, cited above, § 79; Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, § 192, ECHR 2014 (extracts); Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. - LG Düsseldorf, 05.02.2018 - 18 KLs 2/17
Hohe Freiheitsstrafe gegen neun Angeklagte wegen betrügerischer Abrechnung von …
In mehreren Urteilen des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte wurden schlechte Haftbedingungen in Russland festgestellt (vgl. EGMR, Urt. v. 3. Juli 2014 - 13255/07, NVwZ 2015, 569;… Urt. v. 10. Januar 2012 - 42525/07 u. 60800/08, NVwZ-RR 2013, 284;… Urt. v. 15. Juli 2002 - 47095/99, NVwZ 2005, 303). - EGMR, 31.05.2018 - 33234/12
Litauen und Rumänien mitverantwortlich für CIA-Folter
The Court is also attentive to the seriousness that attaches to a ruling that a Contracting State has violated fundamental rights (see, among other examples, Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 161, Series A no. 25; Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 147, ECHR 2005-VII; Creanga v. Romania [GC], no. 29226/03, § 88, 23 February 2012; El-Masri, cited above, § 151; Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, §§ 93-94, ECHR 2014 (extracts); Al Nashiri v. Poland, cited above, § 394; Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) v. Poland, cited above, § 394; and Nasr and Ghali, cited above, § 119).Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, ECHR 2014 (extracts).
- EGMR, 31.05.2018 - 46454/11
Litauen und Rumänien mitverantwortlich für CIA-Folter
The Court is also attentive to the seriousness that attaches to a ruling that a Contracting State has violated fundamental rights (see, among other examples, Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 161, Series A no. 25; Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 147, ECHR 2005-VII; Creanga v. Romania [GC], no. 29226/03, § 88, 23 February 2012; and El-Masri, cited above, § 151; Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, §§ 93-94, ECHR 2014 (extracts); Al Nashiri v. Poland, cited above, § 394; Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) v. Poland, cited above, § 394; and Nasr and Ghali v. Italy, no. 44883/09, § 119, 23 February 2016).Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, ECHR 2014 (extracts).
- EGMR, 23.07.2020 - 40503/17
M.K. AND OTHERS v. POLAND
The Court's assessment General principles 197. According to the Court's case-law, collective expulsion is to be understood as "any measure compelling aliens, as a group, to leave a country, except where such a measure is taken on the basis of a reasonable and objective examination of the particular case of each individual alien of the group" (see Sultani v. France, no. 45223/05, § 81, ECHR 2007-IV (extracts), and Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, § 167, ECHR 2014 (extracts)). - EGMR, 16.06.2015 - 13216/05
CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES c. ARMÉNIE
Or en l'espèce, même la possibilité d'entendre des témoins à Strasbourg n'a pas été envisagée, bien que cela ait déjà été fait dans des affaires de même nature, en particulier dans l'affaire Géorgie c. Russie (I) ([GC], no 13255/07, CEDH 2014). - EGMR, 26.03.2019 - 14594/07
BERDZENISHVILI AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
In a judgment of 20 December 2016 ("the principal judgment") (Berdzenishvili and Others v. Russia, nos. 14594/07 and 6 others, 20 December 2016), the Court found that several of the applicants had been in one way or another subjected to the administrative practice of arresting, detaining and expelling Georgian nationals, which was in place in the autumn of 2006 in Russia and which the Court had established in its judgment in the inter-State case Georgia v. Russia (I) ([GC], no. 13255/07, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).In its judgment in the inter-State case concerning just satisfaction (Georgia v. Russia (I) (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 13255/07, 31 January 2019), the Court held that the Russian Federation had to pay the Georgian Government a lump-sum of EUR 10, 000,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage suffered by a group of at least 1, 500 Georgian nationals (ibid, § 76).
- EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 14594/07
BERDZENISHVILI AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 16363/07
DZIDZAVA v. RUSSIA
- VG Berlin, 04.03.2016 - 23 K 26.16
Systemische Schwachstellen des Asylverfahrens in Ungarn
- EGMR, 15.09.2015 - 11353/06
SHISHANOV c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA
- EGMR, 19.06.2018 - 16870/11
KAHADAWA ARACHCHIGE AND OTHERS v. CYPRUS
- EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 64418/10
MIHHAILOV v. ESTONIA
- EGMR, 31.05.2016 - 40952/07
ERSIN ERKUS ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
- EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 29272/08
ÖZEN ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
- EGMR, 03.11.2015 - 8494/07
POLAT c. TURQUIE
- EGMR, 22.07.2021 - 51295/11
BADALYAN v. AZERBAIJAN
- EGMR, 29.01.2019 - 4133/16
AHMET TUNÇ AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
- EGMR, 13.02.2018 - 47741/16
MSKHILADZE v. RUSSIA
Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 13255/07 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GEORGIA v. RUSSIA (I)
Art. 33, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
Preliminary objections joined to merits (six month period non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Admissible (englisch) - Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GÉORGIE c. RUSSIE (I)
Art. 33, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
Exceptions préliminaires jointes au fond (délai de six mois non-épuisement des voies de recours internes) Recevable (französisch)
Kurzfassungen/Presse
- RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 03.07.2014 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 31.01.2019 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 03.12.2020 - 13255/07
Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 31.01.2019 - 13255/07 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GÉORGIE c. RUSSIE (I)
Préjudice moral - réparation (Article 41 - Préjudice moral;Satisfaction équitable) (französisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GEORGIA v. RUSSIA (I)
Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 03.07.2014 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 31.01.2019 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 03.12.2020 - 13255/07
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 15.04.2012 - 29520/09
[ENG]
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.01.2019 - 13255/07
This obligation requires the Contracting States to furnish all necessary facilities to the Court, whether it is conducting a fact-finding investigation or performing its general duties as regards the examination of applications" (see, mutatis mutandis, Janowiec and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 55508/07 and 29520/09, § 202, ECHR 2013). - EGMR, 23.11.2010 - 60041/08
GREENS ET M.T. c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.01.2019 - 13255/07
The Court reiterates in this regard that it has in the past always declined to make any awards of punitive or exemplary damages even where such claims are made by individual victims of an administrative practice (see, as the most recent authority, Greens and M.T. v. the United Kingdom, nos. 60041/08 and 60054/08, § 97, ECHR 2010 (extracts), which summarises the Court's case-law on this point). - EGMR, 01.03.2010 - 46113/99
Demopoulos ./. Türkei und 7 andere
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.01.2019 - 13255/07
46113/99 and 7 others, § 69, ECHR 2010; Burmych and Others v. Ukraine (striking out) [GC], nos. - EGMR, 12.10.2017 - 46852/13
BURMYCH AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 03.12.2020 - 13255/07 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GÉORGIE CONTRE LA RUSSIE (I)
Etat défendeur incité à payer la réparation au titre de la satisfaction équitable (französisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GEORGIA AGAINST RUSSIA (I)
Respondent State urged to pay just satisfactions award (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 03.07.2014 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 31.01.2019 - 13255/07
- EGMR, 03.12.2020 - 13255/07