Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SHIOSHVILI AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 - Freedom of movement-general (Article 2 para. 2 of Protocol No. 4 - Freedom to leave a country);Violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 - Prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens-general (Article 4 of Protocol No. ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  SHIOSHVILI AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 18.07.2013 - 2312/08

  MAKTOUF ET DAMJANOVIC c. BOSNIE-HERZÉGOVINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 19356/07

  The Court requires itemised bills and invoices that are sufficiently detailed to enable it to determine to what extent the above requirements have been met (see Maktouf and Damjanovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08, § 94, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 19356/07

  Moreover, the level of persuasion necessary for reaching a particular conclusion and, in this connection, the distribution of the burden of proof, are intrinsically linked to the specificity of the facts, the nature of the allegation made and the Convention right at stake (see Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 147, ECHR 2005-VII).

• EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 8675/15

  Spaniens Abschiebungen verstoßen gegen Menschenrechtskonvention

  Dans quatre d'entre elles (Conka c. Belgique, no 51564/99, §§ 60-63, CEDH 2002 I, Géorgie c. Russie (I), précité, Shioshvili et autres c. Russie, no 19356/07, 20 décembre 2016, et Berdzenishvili et autres c. Russie, nos 14594/07 et 6 autres, 20 décembre 2016), les expulsions concernaient des individus de même origine (des familles de Roms en provenance de Slovaquie dans la première affaire et des ressortissants géorgiens dans les autres).
• EGMR, 21.11.2019 - 61411/15

  Gestrandete Flüchtlingen am Moskauer Flughafen: Gefangen in der Transitzone?

  In so far as the confinement of aliens and asylum-seekers is concerned, the Court reiterates the standard under Article 3 of the Convention, as recapitulated in M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece ([GC], no. 30696/09, §§ 216-18, ECHR 2011 (see also Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 44, ECHR 2001-II; Kaja v. Greece, no. 32927/03, §§ 45-46, 27 July 2006; S.D. v. Greece, no. 53541/07, §§ 45-48, 11 June 2009; Mahamed Jama v. Malta, no. 10290/13, §§ 86-89, 26 November 2015; Khlaifia and Others, cited above, §§ 163-67; Boudraa v. Turkey, no. 1009/16, §§ 28-29, 28 November 2017; and S.F. and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 8138/16, §§ 78-83, 7 December 2017), according to which it must be accompanied by suitable safeguards for the persons concerned and is acceptable only in order to enable States to prevent unlawful immigration while complying with their international obligations and without depriving asylum-seekers of the protection afforded by the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the European Convention on Human Rights (see also Rahimi v. Greece, no. 8687/08, § 62, 5 April 2011, Khlaifia and Others, cited above, § 162, in the context of positive obligations vis-à-vis foreign nationals pending issuance of a transit visa; and Shioshvili and Others v. Russia, no. 19356/07, §§ 83-86, 20 December 2016).
• EGMR, 13.12.2018 - 66650/13

  MURSALIYEV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  This finding makes it unnecessary to determine whether the interference pursued a legitimate aim and was necessary in a democratic society (see Sissanis v. Romania, no. 23468/02, § 78, 25 January 2007; Tatishvili v. Russia, no. 1509/02, § 54, ECHR 2007-I; and Shioshvili and Others v. Russia, no. 19356/07, § 61, 20 December 2016).

 
• EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 17599/07

  KIRIL IVANOV v. BULGARIA

  14594/07 and 6 others, § 37, 20 December 2016; Dzidzava v. Russia, no. 16363/07, § 65, 20 December 2016; and Shioshvili and Others v. Russia, no. 19356/07, § 47, 20 December 2016).
• EGMR, 26.11.2019 - 69111/17

  ZARUBIN AND OTHERS v. LITHUANIA

  In its view, the present case cannot be compared to those cases in which large groups of aliens were expelled without any kind of examination of each applicant's individual situation (see, for instance, Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 27765/09, § 185, ECHR 2012; Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, §§ 172-76, ECHR 2014 (extracts); and Shioshvili and Others v. Russia, no. 19356/07, § 71, 20 December 2016).
• EGMR, 03.09.2019 - 43440/15

  DZELADIN v. NORTH MACEDONIA

  The Court has established in a number of cases its practice concerning complaints about the violation of the right of freedom of movement and the principle of non-discrimination (see, among others, Shioshvili and Others v. Russia, no. 19356/07, 20 December 2016; Timishev v. Russia, nos. 55762/00 and 55974/00, ECHR 2005-XII; and Pilav v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 41939/07, 9 June 2016).