Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 14.03.2019 - 30015/96, 38418/97, 36088/97, 30742/03, 26307/95, 25165/94, 7050/05, 22947/93, 21894/93, 56760/00, 24351/94, 63758/00, 30949/96, 25657/94, 41964/98, 25660/94, 44936/04, 10036/03, 25659/94, 45403/99, 28298/95, 23657/94, 39436/98, 54182/00, 27693/95, 25704/ |
Zitiervorschläge
EGMR, 14.03.2019 - 30015/96, 38418/97, 36088/97, 30742/03, 26307/95, 25165/94, 7050/05, 22947/93, 21894/93, 56760/00, 24351/94, 63758/00, 30949/96, 25657/94, 41964/98, 25660/94, 44936/04, 10036/03, 25659/94, 45403/99, 28298/95, 23657/94, 39436/98, 54182/00, 27693/95, 25704/ (https://dejure.org/2019,5867)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 14.03.2019 - 30015/96, 38418/97, 36088/97, 30742/03, 26307/95, 25165/94, 7050/05, 22947/93, 21894/93, 56760/00, 24351/94, 63758/00, 30949/96, 25657/94, 41964/98, 25660/94, 44936/04, 10036/03, 25659/94, 45403/99, 28298/95, 23657/94, 39436/98, 54182/00, 27693/95, 25704/ (https://dejure.org/2019,5867)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 14. März 2019 - 30015/96, 38418/97, 36088/97, 30742/03, 26307/95, 25165/94, 7050/05, 22947/93, 21894/93, 56760/00, 24351/94, 63758/00, 30949/96, 25657/94, 41964/98, 25660/94, 44936/04, 10036/03, 25659/94, 45403/99, 28298/95, 23657/94, 39436/98, 54182/00, 27693/95, 25704/ (https://dejure.org/2019,5867)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2019,5867) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
A. ET AUTRES CONTRE LA TURQUIE ET 204 AUTRES AFFAIRES
Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises pour l'exécution de l'engagement auquel a été subordonnée la solution de l'affaire (französisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
A. AND OTHERS AGAINST TURKEY AND 204 OTHER CASES
Information given by the government concerning measures taken for the execution of the undertakings attached to the solution of the case (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 30015/96
- EGMR, 27.07.2004 - 30015/96
- EGMR, 14.03.2019 - 30015/96, 38418/97, 36088/97, 30742/03, 26307/95, 25165/94, 7050/05, 22947/93, 21894/93, 56760/00, 24351/94, 63758/00, 30949/96, 25657/94, 41964/98, 25660/94, 44936/04, 10036/03, 25659/94, 45403/99, 28298/95, 23657/94, 39436/98, 54182/00, 27693/95, 25704/
Wird zitiert von ... (14)
- EGMR, 17.07.2014 - 47848/08
CENTRE FOR LEGAL RESOURCES ON BEHALF OF VALENTIN CÂMPEANU v. ROMANIA
Pour qu'il y ait une telle obligation positive, il doit être établi que les autorités savaient ou auraient dû savoir au vu des circonstances que la victime était menacée de manière réelle et immédiate du fait des actes criminels d'un tiers (Nencheva et autres, précité, § 108) et qu'elles n'ont pas pris, dans le cadre de leurs pouvoirs, les mesures dont on peut raisonnablement estimer qu'elles auraient sans doute pallié ce risque (A. et autres c. Turquie, no 30015/96, §§ 44-45, 27 juillet 2004). - EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 12336/03
PERISAN ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
Au vu des critères posés par sa jurisprudence (Kurt c. Turquie, 25 mai 1998, §§ 130-134, Recueil 1998-III ; Çakıcı c. Turquie [GC], no 23657/94, §§ 98-99, CEDH 1999-IV; et Berktay, précité, §§ 171-176), la Cour considère que la présente affaire ne comporte pas suffisamment de facteurs particuliers qui auraient pu conférer à la souffrance de leur famille une dimension et un caractère distincts du désarroi affectif que l'on peut considérer comme inévitable pour les proches d'une personne victime de violations graves des droits de l'homme. - EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57942/00
KHASHIYEV AND AKAYEVA v. RUSSIA
Il convient en vérité de considérer que la charge de la preuve pèse sur les autorités, qui doivent fournir une explication satisfaisante et convaincante (Salman c. Turquie [GC], no 21986/93, § 100, CEDH 2000-VII ; Çakıcı c. Turquie [GC], no 23657/94, § 85, CEDH 1999-IV ; Ertak c. Turquie, no 20764/92, § 32, CEDH 2000-V ; Timurtas c. Turquie, no 23531/94, § 82, CEDH 2000-VI).
- EGMR, 17.10.2023 - 59564/16
AVCIOGLU c. TÜRKIYE
Or, la Cour relève que ces actes n'étaient pas aptes à faire la lumière sur les allégations du requérant selon lesquelles il avait été victime de mauvais traitements pendant sa garde à vue (comparer avec Bi?Ÿkin c. Turquie, no 45403/99, § 70, 10 janvier 2006). - EGMR, 11.04.2019 - 38089/12
SARWARI ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE
En ce qui concerne la qualité des rapports médicolégaux, la Cour note que selon les normes du CPT, entérinée par sa jurisprudence (Akkoç c. Turquie, nos 22947/93 et 22948/93, § 118, CEDH 2000-X), la réalisation d'examens médicaux appropriés est une garantie essentielle contre les mauvais traitements pour les personnes placées en garde à vue (paragraphe 61 ci-dessus). - EGMR, 25.02.2014 - 651/10
MAKBULE KAYMAZ ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
Compte tenu de la situation familiale, de l'âge et de l'activité du défunt, la Cour estime devoir s'inspirer notamment de la somme accordée au même titre dans l'affaire Koku c. Turquie (no 27305/95, § 194, 31 mai 2005 ; voir, également, Akkum et autres c. Turquie, no 21894/93, § 286, CEDH 2005-II (extraits), Çelikbilek c. Turquie, no 27693/95, § 119, 31 mai 2005, et Anık et autres c. Turquie, no 63758/00, § 91, 5 juin 2007). - EGMR, 09.11.2010 - 22746/03
ÖLMEZ ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
Compte tenu de la situation familiale, de l'âge et de l'activité du défunt, la Cour estime devoir s'inspirer notamment de la somme accordée à ce titre dans l'affaire Koku c. Turquie (no 27305/95, § 194, 31 mai 2005 - voir également, Akkum et autres c. Turquie, no 21894/93, § 286, CEDH 2005-II (extraits), Çelikbilek c. Turquie, no 27693/95, § 119, 31 mai 2005, et Anık et autres c. Turquie, no 63758/00, § 91, 5 juin 2007). - EGMR, 17.05.2011 - 33062/03
AZGIN c. TURQUIE
Tout bien considéré, la Cour conclut que, en l'absence d'éléments susceptibles de fournir un quelconque indice de nature à l'étayer et faute d'avoir été dûment portée à la connaissance des autorités judiciaires, cette nouvelle allégation ne saurait passer pour « défendable'(voir, par exemple, Salman c. Turquie [GC], no 21986/93, § 121, CEDH 2000-VII, Ä°lhan, précité, § 97, Çakıcı c. Turquie [GC], no 23657/94, § 113, CEDH 1999-IV). - EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 7309/04
VEFA SERDAR c. TURQUIE
De son côté, le Gouvernement estime qu'à la lumière de la jurisprudence pertinente en matière des obligations procédurales (Çakıcı c. Turquie [GC], no 23657/94, § 86, CEDH 1999-IV, Kelly et autres c. Royaume-Uni, no 30054/96, §§ 96 et 97, 4 mai 2001, et Anguelova c. Bulgarie, no 38361/97, §§ 137 et 139, CEDH 2002-IV), l'ensemble des investigations et procédures entamées en l'espèce devraient passer pour exemptes de toute reproche. - EGMR, 05.03.2019 - 36366/06
YAVAS ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
En ce qui concerne le problème de l'indépendance des juges du fait qu'ils sont nommés par le Haut Conseil de la magistrature, présidé par le ministre de la Justice et dépendant du pouvoir politique, la Cour a déjà eu l'occasion de se prononcer sur un grief semblable dans l'affaire Çelebi c. Turquie ((déc.), no 54182/00, 28 septembre 2004) dans les termes suivants:. - EGMR, 29.01.2013 - 2737/06
BARTAN c. TURQUIE
- EGMR, 08.08.2006 - 47278/99
MAHMUT YILMAZ ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE
- EGMR, 08.08.2006 - 45736/99
D.A. ET B.Y. c. TURQUIE
- EGMR, 22.03.2005 - 30951/96
AY c. TURQUIE
Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2005,63930) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
AKDENIZ v. TURKEY
Art. 6, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 32, Art. 41, Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 MRK
Violation of Art. 2 (presumed death) Violation of Art. 2 (failure to investigate) Violations of Art. 3 Violation of Art. 5 Not necessary to examine Art. 6 Violation of Art. 13 Not necessary to examine Art. 14 Pecuniary damage - financial award Non-pecuniary damage ...
Verfahrensgang
- EKMR, 01.12.1997 - 25165/94
- EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
Wird zitiert von ... (10) Neu Zitiert selbst (13)
- EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23763/94
TANRIKULU c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
The authorities must have taken the reasonable steps available to them to secure the evidence concerning the incident, including, inter alia, eye-witness testimony (see, concerning witnesses, for example, Tanrıkulu v. Turkey [GC], no. 23763/94, § 109, ECHR 1999-IV). - EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 22277/93
ILHAN c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
They cannot leave it to the initiative of the next of kin either to lodge a formal complaint or to take responsibility for the conduct of any investigatory procedures (see, for example, mutatis mutandis, Ä°lhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, § 63, ECHR 2000-VII). - EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
McKERR c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
However, a prompt response by the authorities in investigating a use of lethal force or disappearance may generally be regarded as essential in maintaining public confidence in their maintenance of the rule of law and in preventing any appearance of collusion in, or tolerance of, unlawful acts (see, in general, McKerr v. the United Kingdom, no. 28883/95, §§ 108-115, ECHR 2001-III).
- EGMR, 13.06.1994 - 10588/83
BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN (ARTICLE 50)
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
As regards the applicant's claim for loss of earnings, the Court's case-law has established that there must be a clear causal connection between the damage claimed by the applicant and the violation of the Convention and that this may, in appropriate cases, include compensation in respect of loss of earnings (see, among other authorities, Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain (Article 50), judgment of 13 June 1994, Series A no. 285-C, pp. - EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82
BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
The complaints under Articles 2, 3 and 5 are therefore clearly arguable for the purposes of Article 13 of the Convention (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, § 52, together with Kaya and Yasa judgments, § 107 and § 113, respectively, cited above). - EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23657/94
ÇAKICI v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; Çakıcı v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, § 85, ECHR 1999-IV, and Timurtas, cited above, § 82). - EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22492/93
KILIÇ v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
It is further to be recalled that the Court has held in previous judgments that defects undermining the effectiveness of criminal-law protection in the south-east during the period relevant also to this case, permitted or fostered a lack of accountability of members of the security forces for their actions (Kılıç v. Turkey, no. 22492/93, § 75, ECHR 2000-III, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 98, ECHR 2000-III). - EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93
MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
It is further to be recalled that the Court has held in previous judgments that defects undermining the effectiveness of criminal-law protection in the south-east during the period relevant also to this case, permitted or fostered a lack of accountability of members of the security forces for their actions (Kılıç v. Turkey, no. 22492/93, § 75, ECHR 2000-III, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 98, ECHR 2000-III). - EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94
TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
The Court considers that such a serious contradiction directly affects the credibility of the version of the facts as presented by the Government and, moreover, justifies the drawing of inferences as to the well-foundedness of the applicant's allegations (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 66, ECHR 2000-VI). - EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93
Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …
Auszug aus EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; Çakıcı v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, § 85, ECHR 1999-IV, and Timurtas, cited above, § 82). - EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91
McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 27.08.1991 - 12750/87
PHILIS v. GREECE
- EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 9310/81
POWELL ET RAYNER c. ROYAUME-UNI
- EGMR, 26.03.2013 - 21794/08
ZORICA JOVANOVIC v. SERBIA
Maîtresse de la qualification juridique des faits (Akdeniz c. Turquie, no 25165/94, § 88, 31 mai 2005), la Cour considère qu'il y a lieu d'examiner ce grief sur le terrain de l'article 8 de la Convention, lequel dispose en ses passages pertinents:. - EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 2944/06
ASLAKHANOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Thus, the Court has dealt with a "pattern of enforced disappearances" occurring principally between 1992 and 1996 in South-Eastern Turkey (see, among others, OsmanoÄŸlu v. Turkey, no. 48804/99, 24 January 2008; Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, 31 May 2005; Ä°pek v. Turkey, no. 25760/94, ECHR 2004-II (extracts); Akdeniz and Others v. Turkey, no. 23954/94, 31 May 2001; Tas v. Turkey, no. 24396/94, 14 November 2000; Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, ECHR 2000-VI; Ertak v. Turkey, no. 20764/92, ECHR 2000-V; and Çakıcı v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, ECHR 1999-IV). - EGMR, 14.11.2017 - 41226/09
Türkei verurteilt: Nicht jeder ist ein Terrorist
The Court reiterates that it is the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case and is not bound by the characterisation given by the applicant or the Government (see Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, § 88, 31 May 2005; Aksu v. Turkey [GC], nos.
- EGMR, 19.01.2016 - 17526/10
GÜLCÜ v. TURKEY
The Court reiterates that it is the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case and is not bound by the characterisation given by the applicant or the Government (see Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, § 88, 31 May 2005; Aksu v. Turkey [GC], nos. - EGMR, 12.07.2016 - 34661/07
MUCIBABIC v. SERBIA
In the light of its case-law (see, for example, Öneryildiz v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, ECHR 2004-XII, and Pereira Henriques v. Luxembourg, no. 60255/00, 9 May 2006) and being the "master of the characterisation" to be given in law to the facts of any case before it (see Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, § 88, 31 May 2005 and Mladenovic v. Serbia, no. 1099/08, § 35, 22 May 2012), the Court considers that this complaint falls to be examined under Article 2 of the Convention (see Gina Ionescu v. Romania, no. 15318/09, § 28, 11 December 2012), which reads as follows:. - EGMR, 01.03.2018 - 78241/13
SELAMI AND OTHERS v.
The Court, being the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case (see, for instance, Buzadji v. the Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, § 61, ECHR 2016 (extracts) and Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, § 88, 31 May 2005), considers that the applicants" complaints are to be examined under Articles 3 and 5 § 5 of the Convention, which read as follows:. - EGMR, 16.04.2013 - 3598/03
MERYEM ÇELIK AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
The Court further noted that in its examination of a number of those disappearances, it had reached the conclusion that the disappearance of a person in south-east Turkey at the relevant time could be regarded as a life-threatening event (see, Er and Others, cited above, § 77, and the following cases cited therein: OsmanoÄ?lu v. Turkey, no. 48804/99, 24 January 2008; Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, 31 May 2005; Ä°pek, cited above; Akdeniz and Others v. Turkey, no. 23954/94, 31 May 2001; Çiçek, cited above; Tas v. Turkey, no. 24396/94, 14 November 2000; Timurtas, cited above; Ertak v. Turkey, no. 20764/92, ECHR 2000-V; and Çakıcı v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, ECHR 1999-IV). - EGMR, 02.06.2015 - 13320/02
KYRIACOU TSIAKKOURMAS AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
The Court, being the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of any case before it (see Zorica Jovanovic v. Serbia, no. 21794/08, § 43, ECHR 2013, and Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, § 88, 31 May 2005), considers that these complaints fall to be examined under Article 5 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention, which read as follows:. - EGMR, 05.02.2013 - 10968/04
KECMAN v. SERBIA
The Court, being the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case (see Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, § 88, 31 May 2005), considers that the applicant's complaint falls to be examined under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 read separately and in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention (see, for example, Gratzinger and Gratzingerova v. the Czech Republic (dec.) [GC], no. 39794/98, ECHR 2002-VII). - EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 2611/07
DOBRIC v. SERBIA
Being the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of any case before it, the Court considers that the above complaints fall to be examined under Articles 6 § 1 of the Convention only (see Akdeniz v. Turkey, no. 25165/94, § 88, 31 May 2005, and García Manibardo v. Spain, no. 38695/97, § 36, ECHR 2000-II).
Rechtsprechung
| EKMR, 01.12.1997 - 25165/94 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1997,33001) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
Verfahrensgang
- EKMR, 01.12.1997 - 25165/94
- EGMR, 31.05.2005 - 25165/94
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (1)
- EGMR, 22.05.1984 - 8805/79
DE JONG, BALJET ET VAN DEN BRINK c. PAYS-BAS
Auszug aus EKMR, 01.12.1997 - 25165/94
It is furthermore established that the burden of proving the existence of available and sufficient domestic remedies lies upon the State invoking the rule (cf. Eur. Court HR, De Jong, Baljet and Van den Brink v. the Netherlands judgment of 22 May 1984, Series A no. 77, p. 18, para. 36, and Nos. 14116/88, and 14117/88, Sargin and Yagci v. Turkey, Dec. 11.05.89, D.R. 61 p. 250).