Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 16437/04 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2008,48660) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
KOBETS v. UKRAINE
Art. 3 MRK
No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Procedural aspect) (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (7)
- EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95
LABITA c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 16437/04
It prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances or the victim's behaviour (see, among other authorities, Labita v. Italy [GC], no 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV). - EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 16437/04
It has deemed 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 Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 92, ECHR 2000-XI). - EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
McKERR c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 16437/04
The Court is sensitive to the subsidiary nature of its role and recognises that it must be cautious in taking on the role of a first-instance tribunal of fact, where this is not rendered unavoidable by the circumstances of a particular case (see, for example, McKerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 28883/95, 4 April 2000).
- EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94
AVSAR c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 16437/04
Nonetheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention the Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, § 32, and Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 283, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)). - EGMR, 24.07.2001 - 44558/98
VALASINAS v. LITHUANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 16437/04
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 gender, age and state of health of the victim (see Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, §§ 100-01, ECHR 2001-VIII). - EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87
TOMASI c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 16437/04
The Court 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 of the cause of the injury, failing which a clear issue arises under Article 3 of the Convention (see Tomasi v. France, judgment of 27 August 1992, Series A no. 241-A, p. 4-41, §§ 108-111, and Ribitsch, cited above, p. 26, § 34). - EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91
RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 16437/04
Nonetheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention the Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, § 32, and Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 283, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)).