Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BILYY v. UKRAINE

  (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 22.05.2007 - 14475/03
• EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

  PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, and the conduct of the applicant and that of the relevant authorities (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see Labita v.Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 152-153, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 08.04.2004 - 71503/01

  ASSANIDZE v. GEORGIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  While it is for the national authorities, notably the courts, to interpret and apply domestic law, the Court may review whether national law has been observed for the purposes of this Convention provision (see, among other authorities, Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 171, ECHR 2004-II).

 
• EGMR, 05.04.2005 - 54825/00

  NEVMERZHITSKY v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  The provisions of the Code which concern detention on remand are summarised in the judgments of Nevmerzhitsky v. Ukraine (no. 54825/00, § 54, ECHR 2005-II (extracts)), and Solovey and Zozulya v. Ukraine (nos. 40774/02 and 4048/03, § 43, 27 November 2008)).
• EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 15250/02

  BEKOS AND KOUTROPOULOS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  The Court also reiterates that "where an individual is taken into police custody in good health but is found to be injured at the time of release, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation as to the cause of the injury, failing which a clear issue arises under Article 3 of the Convention" (see Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, § 34; Aksoy v. Turkey, judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports 1996-VI, § 61; and Bekos and Koutropoulos v. Greece, no. 15250/02, § 47, ECHR 2005).
• EGMR, 09.03.2006 - 59261/00

  MENECHEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  The Court further notes that where an individual raises an arguable claim that he or she has been ill-treated by the police in breach of Article 3, that provision requires that there should be an effective official investigation capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see, among many others, Menesheva v. Russia, no. 59261/00, §§ 64 and 71-73, ECHR 2006).
• EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73

  WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  Moreover, the Court must ascertain whether domestic law itself is in conformity with the Convention, including the general principles expressed or implied therein (see Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, pp. 19-20, § 45).
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  The Court also reiterates that "where an individual is taken into police custody in good health but is found to be injured at the time of release, it is incumbent on the State to provide a plausible explanation as to the cause of the injury, failing which a clear issue arises under Article 3 of the Convention" (see Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, § 34; Aksoy v. Turkey, judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports 1996-VI, § 61; and Bekos and Koutropoulos v. Greece, no. 15250/02, § 47, ECHR 2005).
• EGMR, 27.11.2008 - 40774/02

  SOLOVEY AND ZOZULYA v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2010 - 14475/03

  The provisions of the Code which concern detention on remand are summarised in the judgments of Nevmerzhitsky v. Ukraine (no. 54825/00, § 54, ECHR 2005-II (extracts)), and Solovey and Zozulya v. Ukraine (nos. 40774/02 and 4048/03, § 43, 27 November 2008)).