Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ABDI IBRAHIM v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Zitiert selbst (9)
- EGMR, 27.05.2008 - 26565/05
N. ./. Vereinigtes Königreich
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
On the other hand, the mere fact of return to a country where one's economic position will be worse than in a Contracting State is not sufficient to meet the threshold of ill-treatment proscribed by Article 3 (see Miah v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 53080/07, § 14, 27 April 2010 and, mutatis mutandis, N. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 26565/05, § 42, 27 May 2008).In the absence of exceptionally compelling humanitarian grounds against removal, the fact that the applicant's circumstances, including his life expectancy, would be significantly reduced if he were to be removed from the Contracting State is not sufficient in itself to give rise to breach of Article 3 (see N. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 26565/05, § 42, ECHR 2008; see also Sufi and Elmi, cited above, § 282).
- EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 1948/04
Somalia, Abschiebungshindernis, zielstaatsbezogene Abschiebungshindernisse, …
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
Mr Höhne referred to the Court's conclusions in Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, 11 January 2007 that individuals without ties to Somaliland would risk being turned back at the airport or subjected to harassment and abuse by the authorities.The reports of which the Government were aware did not support this conclusion, and in Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, § 139, 11 January 2007, the Court drew a clear distinction between the position of persons such as Salah Sheek, who had no ties to the majority clans in the region, and members of the majority clan, such as this applicant.
- EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 60286/09
[ENG]
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
Particularly in light of the fact that the majority of the applicant's offences were committed when he was already an adult, the Court finds that the applicant cannot excuse his past criminal conduct by reference to his upbringing (see, mutatis mutandis, Balogun v. the United Kingdom, no. 60286/09, § 58, 10 April 2012).
- EGMR, 28.05.1985 - 9214/80
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
It is settled case-law that Contracting States have the right as a matter of international law and subject to their treaty obligations, including the Convention, to control the entry, residence and expulsion of aliens (Üner v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 46410/99, § 54, ECHR 2006-....; Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 May 1985, Series A no. 94, p. 34, § 67, Boujlifa v. France, judgment of 21 October 1997, Reports 1997-VI, p. 2264, § 42). - EGMR, 09.10.1979 - 6289/73
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
Although many of the rights it contains have implications of a social or economic nature, the Convention is essentially directed at the protection of civil and political rights (Airey v. Ireland, judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32, § 26). - EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
This in turn must be considered in the light of the general situation there as well as the applicant's personal circumstances (Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, § 108). - EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 45276/99
Tansania, CUF, Civic United Front, Oppositionelle, Inhaftierung, Folter, …
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
These standards imply that the ill-treatment the applicant alleges he will face if returned must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this is relative, depending on all the circumstances of the case (Hilal v. the United Kingdom, no. 45276/99, § 60, ECHR 2001-II). - EGMR, 26.07.2005 - 38885/02
N. v. FINLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
It is in principle for the applicant to adduce evidence capable of proving that there are substantial grounds for believing that, if the measure complained of were to be implemented, he would be exposed to a real risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to Article 3 (see N. v. Finland, no. 38885/02, § 167, 26 July 2005). - EGMR, 27.04.2010 - 53080/07
MIAH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 14535/10
On the other hand, the mere fact of return to a country where one's economic position will be worse than in a Contracting State is not sufficient to meet the threshold of ill-treatment proscribed by Article 3 (see Miah v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 53080/07, § 14, 27 April 2010 and, mutatis mutandis, N. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 26565/05, § 42, 27 May 2008).
- EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 34098/11
[ENG]
(See also M.S. v. United Kingdom (dec.), 56090/08, 16 October 2012 and Hassan Ahmed ABDI IBRAHIM v. United Kingdom (dec.), 14535/10, 18 September 2012). - EGMR, 17.09.2013 - 3202/09
[ENG]
The mere fact of return to a country where the applicant's economic position will be worse than in a Contracting State is not sufficient to meet the threshold of ill-treatment proscribed by Article 3 (see Miah v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 53080/07, § 14, 27 April 2010 and Abdi Ibrahim v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 14535/10, § 31, 18 September 2012).
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen. Falls Sie noch kein Benutzerkonto haben, können Sie sich in weniger als einer Minute eines kostenlos anlegen "Registrieren".