Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MANUKYAN v. ARMENIA

  Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  MANUKYAN v. ARMENIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Zitiert selbst (13)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 15.06.2021 - 62903/15

  EGMR zu Recht auf Leben im Falle häuslicher Gewalt

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  The Court will therefore examine whether the authorities knew or should have known of the existence of a real and immediate risk that S. Manukyan would commit suicide and, if so, whether they did all that could reasonably have been expected of them to avoid that risk from materialising (see Kurt v. Austria [GC], no. 62903/15, §§ 157-60, 15 June 2021).
• EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 37685/10

  RADOMILJA AND OTHERS v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  Since it is master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case (see Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, §§ 114, 124 and 126, 20 March 2018), the Court finds it appropriate to examine the applicant's complaints solely under Article 2 of the Convention.
• EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 32631/09

  Fall Magnitski: Russland verletzte mehrfach Menschenrechte

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  It is thus unnecessary to examine the other aspects of the investigation (see, mutatis mutandis, Magnitskiy and Others v. Russia, nos. 32631/09 and 53799/12, § 272, 27 August 2019, and Anahit Mkrtchyan v. Armenia, no. 3673/11, § 101, 7 May 2020).

• EGMR, 17.06.2008 - 21899/02

  ABDULLAH YILMAZ c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  Furthermore, States are required to secure high professional standards among regular soldiers, whose acts and omissions - particularly vis-à-vis conscripts - could, in certain circumstances, engage their responsibility, inter alia, under the substantive limb of Article 2 (see Abdullah Yilmaz v. Turkey, no. 21899/02, §§ 56-57, 17 June 2008, see also, mutatis mutandis, Stoyanovi v. Bulgaria, no. 42980/04, § 61, 9 November 2010).
• EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 30500/11

  MALIK BABAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  Substantive limb 17. The Court will examine the matter in the light of the relevant general principles, as summarised in Mosendz v. Ukraine (no. 52013/08, §§ 90-93, 17 January 2013), Perevedentsevy v. Russia (no. 39583/05, §§ 91-94, 24 April 2014), Malik Babayev v. Azerbaijan (no. 30500/11, §§ 64-68, 1 June 2017) and most recently in Boychenko v. Russia (no. 8663/08, §§ 76-80, 12 October 2021, with further references).
• EGMR, 24.03.2009 - 27866/03

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  At the same time, and due to the authorities' own failure to conduct an adequate investigation into the matter, the material before the Court does not allow it to support the hypothesis that S. Manukyan's life was taken intentionally (contrast Beker v. Turkey, no. 27866/03, §§ 45-54, 24 March 2009, and Lapshin v. Azerbaijan, no. 13527/18, §§ 110-20, 20 May 2021; see also, mutatis mutandis, Mi?¾igárová v. Slovakia, no. 74832/01, § 89, 14 December 2010).
• EGMR, 24.04.2014 - 39583/05

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  Substantive limb 17. The Court will examine the matter in the light of the relevant general principles, as summarised in Mosendz v. Ukraine (no. 52013/08, §§ 90-93, 17 January 2013), Perevedentsevy v. Russia (no. 39583/05, §§ 91-94, 24 April 2014), Malik Babayev v. Azerbaijan (no. 30500/11, §§ 64-68, 1 June 2017) and most recently in Boychenko v. Russia (no. 8663/08, §§ 76-80, 12 October 2021, with further references).
• EGMR, 17.01.2013 - 52013/08

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  Substantive limb 17. The Court will examine the matter in the light of the relevant general principles, as summarised in Mosendz v. Ukraine (no. 52013/08, §§ 90-93, 17 January 2013), Perevedentsevy v. Russia (no. 39583/05, §§ 91-94, 24 April 2014), Malik Babayev v. Azerbaijan (no. 30500/11, §§ 64-68, 1 June 2017) and most recently in Boychenko v. Russia (no. 8663/08, §§ 76-80, 12 October 2021, with further references).
• EGMR, 20.05.2021 - 13527/18

  LAPSHIN v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  At the same time, and due to the authorities' own failure to conduct an adequate investigation into the matter, the material before the Court does not allow it to support the hypothesis that S. Manukyan's life was taken intentionally (contrast Beker v. Turkey, no. 27866/03, §§ 45-54, 24 March 2009, and Lapshin v. Azerbaijan, no. 13527/18, §§ 110-20, 20 May 2021; see also, mutatis mutandis, Mi?¾igárová v. Slovakia, no. 74832/01, § 89, 14 December 2010).
• EGMR, 07.05.2020 - 3673/11

  MKRTCHYAN v. ARMENIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.06.2022 - 2303/12

  It is thus unnecessary to examine the other aspects of the investigation (see, mutatis mutandis, Magnitskiy and Others v. Russia, nos. 32631/09 and 53799/12, § 272, 27 August 2019, and Anahit Mkrtchyan v. Armenia, no. 3673/11, § 101, 7 May 2020).
• EGMR, 12.10.2021 - 8663/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 30677/10

  DURDU v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 09.11.2010 - 42980/04

  [ENG]

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• VGH Baden-Württemberg, 29.03.2017 - 11 S 2029/16

  Ausweisung eines Angolaners; Vater von drei deutschen Kindern; Vermögensdelikte; …

  Rn. 95 Zwar ist nach ständiger Rechtsprechung des Senats die Rückkehrentscheidung im Sinne des Art. 6 Abs. 1 RFRL, Art. 3 Nr. 4 RFRL allein die Abschiebungsandrohung (vgl. etwa Urteile vom 10.02.2012 - 11 S 1361/11 -, NVwZ-RR 2012, 492 und vom 07.12.2011 - 11 S 897/11 -, NVwZ-RR 2012, 412; Beschlüsse vom 30.08.2016 - 11 S 1660/16 -, InfAuslR 2016, 421 und vom 19.12.2012 - 1 S 2303/12 -, InfAuslR 2013, 98;… Funke-Kaiser, in: GK-AufenthG, § 59 Rn. 307 ) und nicht die Ausweisung (siehe etwa Urteile vom 30.04.2014 - 11 S 244/14 -, juris, vom 15.10.2013 - 11 S 2114/13 -, juris und vom 10.02.2012 - 11 S 1361/11 -, juris;… vgl. auch Funke-Kaiser, in: GK-AufenthG, § 59 Rn. 292 ;… Bauer, in: Bergmann/Dienelt, AuslR, 11. Aufl., 2016 § 11 Rn. 15 ff.).
• EGMR, 26.03.2026 - 19234/18

  SHABRATSKYY AND SHABRATSKA v. UKRAINE

  In the Court's view, leaving such important questions unanswered amounts in itself to a flaw serious enough to render the investigation ineffective (compare Manukyan v. Armenia [Committee], no. 2303/12, §§ 14-15, 21 June 2022).
• EGMR, 26.03.2026 - 48419/16

  MUSINA AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

  They, however, left that important question unanswered, which in itself was a flaw serious enough to render the investigation ineffective (compare Manukyan v. Armenia [Committee], no. 2303/12, §§ 14-15, 21 June 2022).