Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 07.06.2016 - 13621/08, 20071/07, 1608/08, 13421/03, 23463/04 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
HORYCH ET 4 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA POLOGNE
Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises permettant d'éviter de nouvelles violations. Versement des sommes prévues dans l'arrêt (französisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
HORYCH AND 4 OTHER CASES AGAINST POLAND
Information given by the government concerning measures taken to prevent new violations. Payment of the sums provided for in the judgment (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 17.04.2012 - 13621/08
- EGMR, 07.06.2016 - 13621/08, 20071/07, 1608/08, 13421/03, 23463/04
- EGMR - 13621/08 (anhängig)
Wird zitiert von ...
- EGMR, 30.06.2015 - 41418/04
KHOROSHENKO c. RUSSIE
Cependant, le maintien de l'interdiction des contacts directs ne peut se justifier que par l'existence d'un risque réel et continu de ce type (Horych c. Pologne, no 13621/08, §§ 117-132, 17 avril 2012, et Piechowicz c. Pologne, no 20071/07, §§ 205-222, 17 avril 2012).De plus, le précédent invoqué, à savoir l'arrêt Horych c. Pologne, no 13621/08, 17 avril 2012 (précité, § 129) ne vient pas à l'appui de cette affirmation.
Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 23463/04 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SLUSARCZYK v. POLAND
Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention Reasonableness of pre-trial detention) No ...
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Slusarczyk v. Poland
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (6)
- EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 28953/03
SULWINSKA v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 23463/04
To this end, the Court examined carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; and Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03). - EGMR, 06.07.2010 - 23623/07
JARKIEWICZ v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 23463/04
Any "interference by a public authority" with the exercise of the applicant's right to respect for his correspondence will contravene Article 8 § 1 unless it is "in accordance with the law", pursues one or more of the legitimate aims referred to in paragraph 2 and is "necessary in a democratic society" in order to achieve them (see, among many other authorities, Enea v. Italy [GC], no. 74912/01, ECHR 2009-..., § 140, with further references and Jarkiewicz v. Poland, no. 23623/07, 6 July 2010, § 72, with further references). - EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 26307/95
Entscheidung der Großen Kammer über die an sie nach Art. 43 Europäische …
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 23463/04
To this end, the Court examined carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; and Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03).
- EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 17584/04
CELEJEWSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 23463/04
The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the imposition of detention on remand (tymczasowe aresztowanie), the grounds for its extension, release from detention and rules governing other, so-called "preventive measures" (srodki zapobiegawcze) are stated in the Court's judgments in the cases of Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 75-79, ECHR 2000-XI; Baginski v. Poland, no. 37444/97, §§ 42-46, 11 October 2005; and Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, §§ 22-23, 4 May 2006. - EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 23463/04
The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the imposition of detention on remand (tymczasowe aresztowanie), the grounds for its extension, release from detention and rules governing other, so-called "preventive measures" (srodki zapobiegawcze) are stated in the Court's judgments in the cases of Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 75-79, ECHR 2000-XI; Baginski v. Poland, no. 37444/97, §§ 42-46, 11 October 2005; and Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, §§ 22-23, 4 May 2006. - EGMR, 25.01.2000 - 34979/97
WALKER v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 23463/04
In this respect the Court points out that it is not open to it to set aside the application of the six-month rule solely because a respondent Government have not made a preliminary objection based on that rule (see Marchowski v. Poland, no.10273/02, § 48, 8 July 2008, and Walker v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 34979/97, ECHR 2000-I).