Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 2478/15, 1787/15 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
Kurzfassungen/Presse (2)
- aerztezeitung.de (Pressemeldung, 17.07.2015)
Kein Grundrecht auf assistierten Suizid
- juraforum.de (Kurzinformation)
Kein Recht auf assistierten Suizid
Wird zitiert von ... (14) Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02
Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 2478/15
On the first issue, Toulson LJ examined the judgment of the House of Lords in R (Pretty) (see "Relevant domestic law and practice", below) and this Court's judgment in Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, ECHR 2002-III. He concluded that it would be wrong for the court to hold that Article 8 required voluntary euthanasia to afford a possible defence to murder on the basis that this went far beyond anything which this Court had said, would be inconsistent with previous domestic and Strasbourg judgments and would be to usurp the proper role of Parliament.She expressly stated that she did not wish this Court to consider, of its own motion, whether to depart from Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, ECHR 2002-III, and find that the prohibition on assisted suicide was incompatible with Article 8.
- EGMR, 19.07.2012 - 497/09
Mangelnde Prüfung der Klage / des Rechtsmittels des Ehemanns einer sterbewilligen …
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 2478/15
The judges further held that the blanket prohibition in section 2(1) of the 1961 Act was compatible with Article 8. As to the argument that even if the blanket prohibition was compatible with Article 8, this did not liberate the Divisional Court from its obligation to carry out a balancing exercise (citing Koch v. Germany, no. 497/09, 19 July 2012), the judges said:.She alleged a breach of their procedural rights under Article 8, citing Koch v. Germany, no. 497/09, §§ 65-68, 19 July 2012.
- EGMR, 31.01.1986 - 8734/79
BARTHOLD v. GERMANY (ARTICLE 50)
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 2478/15
It is well established in the Court's case-law that Article 13 does not go so far as to guarantee a remedy allowing primary legislation to be challenged before a national authority on the ground of being contrary to the Convention (see, for example, James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 85, Series A no. 98; and Vallianatos and Others v. Greece [GC], nos.
- EGMR, 21.11.2023 - 23092/20
RAUSCH v. GERMANY
2478/15 and 1787/15, §§ 89-94, 23 June 2015). - EGMR, 08.02.2022 - 44101/18
PLAZZI c. SUISSE
Elle exige normalement que les griefs destinés à être formulés au niveau international aient été exposés devant les juridictions internes appropriées, au moins en substance, dans le respect des conditions de forme et des délais prévus par le droit interne (voir, parmi d'autres, Azinas c. Chypre [GC], no 56679/00, § 38, CEDH 2004-III, et Nicklinson et Lamb c. Royaume-Uni (déc.), nos 2478/15 et 1787/15, § 89, 23 juin 2015). - EGMR, 30.10.2018 - 68273/14
GESTUR JÓNSSON AND RAGNAR HALLDÓR HALL v. ICELAND
2478/15 and 1787/15, § 89, 23 June 2015).
- EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 81114/17
ÁDÁM AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
2478/15 and 1787/15, § 90, 23 June 2015). - EGMR, 04.04.2019 - 36538/17
G.S. v. BULGARIA
2478/15 and 1787/15, § 90, 23 June 2015). - EGMR, 19.10.2021 - 15352/11
NIKOLIC v. SERBIA
2478/15 and 1787/15, §§ 89-94, 23 June 2015). - EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 51127/18
STEFANOV v. BULGARIA
2478/15 and 1787/15, § 90, 23 June 2015). - EGMR, 22.06.2017 - 77450/12
S.M.M. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
2478/15 and 1787/15, § 89, 23 June 2015). - EGMR, 28.06.2016 - 41516/10
O'NEILL AND LAUCHLAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
2478/15 and 1787/15, § 89, 23 June 2015). - EGMR, 05.01.2016 - 52335/12
PEACOCK v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
2478/15 and 1787/15, § 89, 23 June 2015). - EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 54318/14
J.M.O. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 55630/15
UNSEEN EHF. v. ICELAND
- EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 62976/12
NAK NAFTOGAZ UKRAINY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 52962/11
BROUGH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM