Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  JAEGER v. ESTONIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Jaeger v. Estonia

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  JAEGER v. ESTONIA

  Art. 3, Art. 8 MRK
  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13
• EGMR, 10.09.2015 - 1574/13

Wird zitiert von ...Zitiert selbst (10)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Ableitung einer allgemeinen Verpflichtung zur Entlassung eines …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  It has also held treatment to be "degrading" because it was such as to arouse in the victims feelings of fear, anguish and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing them (see, for example, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 92, ECHR 2000-XI, and Van der Ven v. the Netherlands, no. 50901/99, § 48, ECHR 2003-II).
• EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95

  PEERS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  The assessment of this minimum level of severity is relative; it depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical and mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and health of the victim (see, among other authorities, Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 67, ECHR 2001-III, and Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 162, Series A no. 25).
• EGMR, 24.07.2001 - 44558/98

  VALASINAS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  It has found that whilst strip searches may be necessary on occasion to ensure prison security or prevent disorder or crime, they must be conducted in an appropriate manner and must be justified (see Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, § 110, ECHR 2003-XII (extracts); Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 117, ECHR 2001-VIII; and Iwanczuk v. Poland, no. 25196/94, § 59, 15 November 2001).

• EGMR, 16.12.1999 - 24888/94

  Mord an James Bulger

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  In order for punishment or treatment to be "inhuman" or "degrading", the suffering or humiliation involved must in any event go beyond that inevitable element of suffering or humiliation connected with a given form of legitimate treatment or punishment (see, for example, V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 71, ECHR 1999-IX, and Van der Ven, loc.
• EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  The Court reiterates that it is not its task to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the domestic courts and, as a general rule, it is for those courts to assess the evidence before them (see, for example, Klaas v. Germany, 22 September 1993, § 29, Series A no. 269).
• EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39084/97

  YANKOV c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  It has found that whilst strip searches may be necessary on occasion to ensure prison security or prevent disorder or crime, they must be conducted in an appropriate manner and must be justified (see Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, § 110, ECHR 2003-XII (extracts); Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 117, ECHR 2001-VIII; and Iwanczuk v. Poland, no. 25196/94, § 59, 15 November 2001).
• EGMR, 15.11.2001 - 25196/94

  IWÁNCZUK v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  It has found that whilst strip searches may be necessary on occasion to ensure prison security or prevent disorder or crime, they must be conducted in an appropriate manner and must be justified (see Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, § 110, ECHR 2003-XII (extracts); Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 117, ECHR 2001-VIII; and Iwanczuk v. Poland, no. 25196/94, § 59, 15 November 2001).
• EKMR, 15.05.1980 - 8317/78

  McFEELEY et al. v. the UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  The Court also notes that the applicant's complaint relates to a body search on one occasion, unlike in the cases of Ciupercescu v. Romania (no. 35555/03, 15 June 2010), Van der Ven (cited above), Lorsé and Others v. the Netherlands (no. 52750/99, 4 February 2003), and McFeeley and Others v. the United Kingdom, (no. 8317/78, Commission decision of 15 May 1980, Decisions and Reports 20, p. 44), or a number of searches, as in the cases of El Shennawy v. France (no. 51246/08, 20 January 2011) or Frérot v. France (no. 70204/01, 12 June 2007).
• EGMR, 26.09.2006 - 12350/04

  WAINWRIGHT c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  As regards the applicability of Article 8, the Court notes that it has in several cases examined complaints related to strip searches under both Article 3 and Article 8 of the Convention (see, for example, Wainwright v. the United Kingdom, no. 12350/04, §§ 41-49, ECHR 2006-X, and Julin v. Estonia, nos.
• EGMR, 30.04.2002 - 45837/99

  KLEUVER v. NORWAY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 1574/13

  The Court finds that this is a case which falls within the scope of Article 8 of the Convention and which requires due justification under its second paragraph (compare Wainwright, cited above, § 46; Kleuver v. Norway (dec.), no. 45837/99, 30 April 2002; and Julin, cited above, § 190).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• BVerfG, 05.11.2016 - 2 BvR 6/16

  Bei der Anordnung der stichprobenartigen Durchsuchung von Strafgefangenen muss …

  Mit Entkleidungen und der Inspektion von Körperöffnungen verbundene Durchsuchungen können danach durch die Erfordernisse der Sicherheit und Ordnung der Haftanstalt gerechtfertigt sein; sie müssen aber in schonender Weise - unter anderem außerhalb möglichen Sichtkontakts anderer Gefangener oder unnötigerweise anwesenden Personals - und dürfen nicht routinemäßig, unabhängig von fallbezogenen Verdachtsgründen, durchgeführt werden (siehe im Einzelnen EGMR, Urteil vom 4. Februar 2003, Van der Ven ./. Niederlande, Beschwerde Nr. 50901/99, Rn. 62; Urteil vom 4. Februar 2003, Lorsé u.a. ./. Niederlande, Beschwerde Nr. 52750/99, Rn. 74;… Urteil vom 12. Juni 2007, Frérot ./. Frankreich, Beschwerde Nr. 70204/01, Rn. 41, 47;… Urteil vom 27. November 2012, Savics ./. Lettland, Beschwerde Nr. 17892/03, Rn. 133, 142 ff.; Urteil vom 10. Oktober 2013, Voloshyn ./. Ukraine, Beschwerde Nr. 15853/08, Rn. 53 f.; Urteil vom 14. Januar 2014, Lindström u.a. ./. Finnland, Beschwerde Nr. 24630/10, Rn. 43; Urteil vom 31. Juli 2014, Jaeger ./. Estland, Beschwerde Nr. 1574/13, Rn. 40 ff.; Urteil vom 14. Juni 2016, Pugzlys ./. Polen, Beschwerde Nr. 446/10, Rn. 58 ff.).