Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SERGEY SOLOVYEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c MRK
  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1-c - Reasonable suspicion) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Zitiert selbst (9)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 25.10.2007 - 4493/04

  LEBEDEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  It further observes that the Government did not refer to any legal provisions permitting an accused to continue to be held in custody once the authorised period of his detention had expired (see ibid.) Moreover, it follows from the relevant provisions of the domestic law that the power to extend the detention of an accused in criminal proceedings is vested in courts and that no exceptions to that rule are permitted or provided for, no matter how short the duration of the detention (see paragraphs 23 and 24 above; Khudoyorov, cited above, § 149; Lebedev v. Russia, no. 4493/04, § 59, 25 October 2007; compare Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 85, 30 January 2003; Salayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 40900/05, §§ 46-48, 9 November 2010).
• EGMR, 17.12.2009 - 20075/03

  SHILBERGS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  It remains to be ascertained whether the redress afforded to the applicant can be considered "sufficient" (see Shilbergs v. Russia, no. 20075/03, §§ 72-74, 17 December 2009).
• EGMR, 13.11.2007 - 38222/02

  RAMADHI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  The Court reiterates that the amount of compensation to be awarded for non-pecuniary damage is assessed with a view to providing "reparation for the anxiety, inconvenience and uncertainty caused by the violation" (see, for example, Ramadhi and Others v. Albania, no. 38222/02, § 99, 13 November 2007, and Shtukaturov v. Russia (just satisfaction), no. 44009/05, § 13, 4 March 2010).

• EGMR, 30.01.2003 - 38884/97

  NIKOLOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  It further observes that the Government did not refer to any legal provisions permitting an accused to continue to be held in custody once the authorised period of his detention had expired (see ibid.) Moreover, it follows from the relevant provisions of the domestic law that the power to extend the detention of an accused in criminal proceedings is vested in courts and that no exceptions to that rule are permitted or provided for, no matter how short the duration of the detention (see paragraphs 23 and 24 above; Khudoyorov, cited above, § 149; Lebedev v. Russia, no. 4493/04, § 59, 25 October 2007; compare Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 85, 30 January 2003; Salayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 40900/05, §§ 46-48, 9 November 2010).
• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 33619/04

  SOKURENKO v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  The Court will examine this complaint under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 203, 31 May 2011, and Sokurenko v. Russia, no. 33619/04, §§ 94-95, 10 January 2012).
• EGMR, 09.11.2010 - 40900/05

  SALAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  It further observes that the Government did not refer to any legal provisions permitting an accused to continue to be held in custody once the authorised period of his detention had expired (see ibid.) Moreover, it follows from the relevant provisions of the domestic law that the power to extend the detention of an accused in criminal proceedings is vested in courts and that no exceptions to that rule are permitted or provided for, no matter how short the duration of the detention (see paragraphs 23 and 24 above; Khudoyorov, cited above, § 149; Lebedev v. Russia, no. 4493/04, § 59, 25 October 2007; compare Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 85, 30 January 2003; Salayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 40900/05, §§ 46-48, 9 November 2010).
• VK Rheinland-Pfalz, 14.05.2002 - 11/02

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  11/02/2013.
• EGMR, 19.07.2007 - 36898/03

  TREPASHKIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  On the notion of "unlawfulness" of criminal prosecution and detention, as interpreted by the Russian courts, see Trepashkin v. Russia (no. 36898/03, § 62, 19 July 2007).
• EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 23939/02

  SHCHERBAKOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 22152/05

  In this connection, the Court notes at the outset that it has already had an opportunity to examine similar arguments by the Government in a number of cases involving "rehabilitation proceedings" where the Russian courts found the applicants" detention on remand unlawful following their acquittal (see, for example, Trepashkin v. Russia, cited above, §§ 69-70, and Shcherbakov v. Russia, no. 23939/02, §§ 55-63, 17 June 2010).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 02.07.2019 - 50271/06

  [ENG]

  They argued that the amount of compensation was comparable to the amounts awarded by the Court in cases concerning short lengths of detention (they referred to Sergey Solovyev v. Russia, no. 22152/05, 25 September 2012, and Tarakanov v. Russia, no. 20403/05, 28 November 2013).
• EGMR, 09.12.2015 - 21153/02

  BEDNOV ET 12 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA RUSSIE

  22152/05.
• EGMR, 30.04.2014 - 37858/08

  [ENG]

  However, the Court notes that this amount is much lower than the amount it generally awards in similar Russian cases (compare, for example, Sergey Solovyev v. Russia, no. 22152/05, § 71, 25 September 2012, and Tarakanov v. Russia, no. 20403/05, § 63, 28 November 2013).