Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GIGOLASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (12)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 18145/05

  Detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among others, Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 57-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Stasaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, §§ 56-61, 21 March 2002; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-41, 10 October 2000; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146, ECHR 2005-... (extracts)).
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 28358/95

  BARANOWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 18145/05

  Detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among others, Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 57-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Stasaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, §§ 56-61, 21 March 2002; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-41, 10 October 2000; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146, ECHR 2005-... (extracts)).
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

  KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 18145/05

  Detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among others, Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 57-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Stasaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, §§ 56-61, 21 March 2002; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-41, 10 October 2000; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146, ECHR 2005-... (extracts)).
• EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 36743/97

  GRAUSLYS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 18145/05

  Detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among others, Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 57-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Stasaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, §§ 56-61, 21 March 2002; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-41, 10 October 2000; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146, ECHR 2005-... (extracts)).
• EGMR, 21.03.2002 - 47679/99

  STASAITIS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 18145/05

  Detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among others, Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 57-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Stasaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, §§ 56-61, 21 March 2002; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-41, 10 October 2000; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146, ECHR 2005-... (extracts)).

• EGMR, 28.11.2017 - 72508/13

  MERABISHVILI c. GÉORGIE

  It is true that detention for an unpredictable amount of time owing to a legislative gap is in breach of the requirement of legal certainty (see Baranowski, cited above, § 56; Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 31 and 35, 8 July 2008; Yeloyev v. Ukraine, no. 17283/02, § 53, 6 November 2008; Solovey and Zozulya v. Ukraine, nos.
• EGMR, 27.01.2009 - 1704/06

  RAMISHVILI AND KOKHREIDZE v. GEORGIA

  Detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and the protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, amongst others, Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 32-36, 8 July 2008; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-41, 10 October 2000; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Khudoyorov, cited above, §§ 146-147).
• EGMR, 14.06.2016 - 72508/13

  MERABISHVILI v. GEORGIA

  With respect to Georgia, that distinct legal problem, similarly giving rise to violations of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in the past, was linked to the now already extinct Code of Criminal Procedure of 20 February 1998 (see Ramishvili and Kokhreidze v. Georgia, no. 1704/06, § 106-111, 27 January 2009; and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 32-36, 8 July 2008), whereas the present case raises novel issues under the new Code of Criminal Procedure which entered into force on 1 October 2010 (see paragraph 59 above).

 
• EGMR, 09.11.2010 - 37138/06

  FARHAD ALIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  It has held that detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and the protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among other cases, Baranowski, cited above, §§ 53-57, ECHR 2000-III; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-63, ECHR 2000-IX; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-40, 10 October 2000; and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 33-36, 8 July 2008).
• EGMR, 13.01.2009 - 37048/04

  GIORGI NIKOLAISHVILI v. GEORGIA

  Detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and the protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, amongst others, Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 32-36, 8 July 2008; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-41, 10 October 2000; Baranowski, cited above, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146-147, ECHR 2005-X).
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 15256/05

  TCHANKOTADZE v. GEORGIA

  Detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, amongst many other authorities, Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 146-147, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Ramishvili and Kokhreidze v. Georgia, no. 1704/06, § 106-111, 27 January 2009; and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 32-36, 8 July 2008).
• EGMR, 25.06.2015 - 36229/11

  ISAYEVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  It has held that detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among other authorities, Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-57, ECHR 2000-III; Jecius, cited above, §§ 60-63; and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 33-36, 8 July 2008).
• EGMR, 06.03.2014 - 49192/08

  ALLAHVERDIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  It has held that detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among other cases, Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-57, ECHR 2000-III; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-63, ECHR 2000-IX; and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 33-36, 8 July 2008).
• EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 21571/05

  MINDADZE AND NEMSITSVERIDZE v. GEORGIA

  The Court notes that it has already found a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention in a number of cases, including those directed against Georgia, concerning the practice of holding defendants in custody without a court order, solely on the basis of the fact that a bill of indictment has been filed with a trial court (see, amongst many other authorities, Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146-147, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-58, ECHR 2000-III; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-64, ECHR 2000-IX; Ramishvili and Kokhreidze v. Georgia, no. 1704/06, § 106-111, 27 January 2009, and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 32-36, 8 July 2008).
• EGMR, 09.12.2010 - 16966/06

  MURADVERDIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  It has held that detaining defendants without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period of time without judicial authorisation - is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and the protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see, among other cases, Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 53-57, ECHR 2000-III; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 60-63, ECHR 2000-IX; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-40, 10 October 2000; and Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 33-36, 8 July 2008).
• EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 39254/10

  PIRGURBAN v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 30.04.2013 - 16206/06

  BERIDZE v. GEORGIA