Webinar: Kostenloses Webinar zum neuen KI-Assistenten morgen, 27. Oktober 2026 11:30 Uhr Unverbindlich anmelden
×
×
Doctrine-WebinarNicht verpassen
Kostenloses Webinar zum neuen KI-Assistenten morgen, 27. Oktober 2026 11:30 - 12:00 Uhr Unverbindlich anmelden

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2012,16317
EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,16317)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 05.06.2012 - 27026/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,16317)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 05. Juni 2012 - 27026/10 (https://dejure.org/2012,16317)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,16317) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    BUNTOV v. RUSSIA

    Art. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies) Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of Article 3 - ...

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (30)Zitiert selbst (25)

  • EGMR, 17.12.2009 - 32704/04

    DENIS VASILYEV v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    Fourth, the victim should be able to participate effectively in the investigation in one form or another, in particular, by having access to the materials of the investigation (see, mutatis mutandis, OÄŸur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, § 92, ECHR 1999-III, and Khadzhialiyev and Others v. Russia, no. 3013/04, § 106, 6 November 2008; see also Denis Vasilyev v. Russia, no. 32704/04, § 157, 17 December 2009; Dedovskiy and Others v. Russia, no. 7178/03, § 92, ECHR 2008 (extracts); and Ognyanova and Choban v. Bulgaria, no. 46317/99, § 107, 23 February 2006).

    He was not granted the procedural status of "victim" and could not therefore exercise the procedural rights attached to that status, such as the rights to lodge applications, to put questions to the experts or to obtain copies of procedural decisions (compare Denis Vasilyev v. Russia, no. 32704/04, § 157, 17 December 2009, and Tarariyeva v. Russia, no. 4353/03, § 93, ECHR 2006-XV (extracts)).

  • EGMR, 26.07.2007 - 48254/99

    COBZARU v. ROMANIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    A somewhat similar (although not always identical in scope and nature) obligation also follows from the Court's case-law under Article 13 of the Convention, which provides that in cases involving serious allegations of ill-treatment, Article 13 requires, in addition to the payment of compensation where appropriate, a thorough and effective investigation capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible for the acts of ill-treatment (see Cobzaru v. Romania, no. 48254/99, §§ 80-82, 26 July 2007; Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, §§ 161-62, ECHR 2002-IV; and Süheyla Aydın v. Turkey, no. 25660/94, § 208, 24 May 2005).

    Nonetheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention the Court must apply a "particularly thorough scrutiny" (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 32, Series A no. 336, and Georgiy Bykov v. Russia, cited above, § 51) even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see Cobzaru v. Romania, no. 48254/99, § 65, 26 July 2007).

  • EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

    Einstufung des in französischer Haft zugefügten Übels als Folter - Verpflichtung …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    Given the severity and deliberate character of that treatment and other relevant factors (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 96, ECHR 1999-V), the Court concludes that the applicant was subjected to torture and that there has therefore been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on this account.
  • EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

    LABITA c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    The Court has often assessed whether authorities reacted promptly to complaints at the relevant time (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 133 et seq., ECHR 2000-IV).
  • EGMR, 24.07.2008 - 41461/02

    VLADIMIR ROMANOV v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    The Court notes that in Vladimir Romanov v. Russia (no. 41461/02, § 86, 24 July 2008) it found that three medical reports which listed injuries sustained by the applicant were deficient, since "no evaluation was carried out with respect to the quantity and nature of the applicant's injuries in view of the different versions of what had occurred".
  • EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57947/00

    ISSAIEVA, YOUSSOUPOVA ET BAZAÏEVA c. RUSSIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    57947/00, 57948/00 and 57949/00, § 147, 24 February 2005; Menesheva, cited above, § 77; and Corsacov v. Moldova, no. 18944/02, § 82, 4 April 2006).
  • EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

    TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    Consideration has been given to the starting of investigations, delays in taking statements (see Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI, and Tekin v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 67, Reports 1998-IV) and to the length of time taken for the initial investigation (see Indelicato v. Italy, no. 31143/96, § 37, 18 October 2001).
  • EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57950/00

    ISAYEVA v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    As regards the possibility of lodging a civil claim, mentioned by the Government, there is no case-law authority for Russian civil courts being able, in the absence of any results from the criminal investigation, to consider independently the merits of a civil claim relating to alleged serious criminal actions, especially in a case such as the present one, where all principal facts are disputed (see Tarariyeva, cited above; Isayeva v. Russia, no. 57950/00, § 155, 24 February 2005; Isayeva and Others v. Russia, nos.
  • EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 7178/03

    DEDOVSKIY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    Fourth, the victim should be able to participate effectively in the investigation in one form or another, in particular, by having access to the materials of the investigation (see, mutatis mutandis, OÄŸur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, § 92, ECHR 1999-III, and Khadzhialiyev and Others v. Russia, no. 3013/04, § 106, 6 November 2008; see also Denis Vasilyev v. Russia, no. 32704/04, § 157, 17 December 2009; Dedovskiy and Others v. Russia, no. 7178/03, § 92, ECHR 2008 (extracts); and Ognyanova and Choban v. Bulgaria, no. 46317/99, § 107, 23 February 2006).
  • EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57948/00
    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 27026/10
    57947/00, 57948/00 and 57949/00, § 147, 24 February 2005; Menesheva, cited above, § 77; and Corsacov v. Moldova, no. 18944/02, § 82, 4 April 2006).
  • EGMR, 24.01.2008 - 839/02

    MASLOVA AND NALBANDOV c. RUSSIE

  • EGMR, 12.03.2009 - 19312/06

    VERGELSKYY v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 06.11.2008 - 3013/04

    KHADZHIALIYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 18.03.2010 - 43233/02

    MAKSIMOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 04.04.2006 - 18944/02

    CORSACOV v. MOLDOVA

  • EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

    Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  • EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91
  • EGMR, 08.11.2011 - 18968/07

    [ENG]

  • EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97

    ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA

  • EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 34056/02
  • EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95
  • EGMR, 18.05.2000 - 41488/98

    VELIKOVA c. BULGARIE

  • EGMR, 14.10.2010 - 24271/03

    GEORGIY BYKOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 12.02.2009 - 3811/02

    DENISENKO AND BOGDANCHIKOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 24.05.2005 - 25660/94

    SÜHEYLA AYDIN v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 08.10.2026 - 55579/19

    ANTONIOU c. GRÈCE

    In the absence of such an explanation the Court can draw inferences that may be unfavourable for the respondent Government (see, for instance, Orhan v. Turkey, no. 25656/94, § 274, 18 June 2002, and Buntov v. Russia, no. 27026/10, § 161, 5 June 2012).
  • EGMR, 23.03.2016 - 47152/06

    BLOKHIN v. RUSSIA

    In the absence of such an explanation the Court can draw inferences which may be unfavourable for the respondent Government (see, for instance, Orhan v. Turkey, no. 25656/94, § 274, 18 June 2002, and Buntov v. Russia, no. 27026/10, § 161, 5 June 2012).
  • EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 46956/09

    [ENG]

    In several cases where the authorities never instituted criminal proceedings and their investigative efforts were limited to a "pre-investigation inquiry", the Court regarded such a legal framework as inadequate, as it undermined the quality of evidence collected and the applicants" right to effective participation in the proceedings in the absence of the procedural status of "victim" (see, mutatis mutandis, Kleyn and Aleksandrovich v. Russia, no. 40657/04, §§ 56-58, 3 May 2012; see further Buntov v. Russia, no. 27026/10, §§ 132-133, 5 June 2012; Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 71386/10, § 193, ECHR 2013 (extracts); and Beresnev v. Russia, no. 37975/02, § 98, 18 April 2013).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
dejure.org Übersicht EGMR
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht