Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GLADYSHEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) Violation of Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (13)Neu Zitiert selbst (15)

• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  In respect of a person deprived of liberty, any recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by his own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see Sheydayev v. Russia, no. 65859/01, § 59, 7 December 2006; Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 38, Series A no. 336; and Krastanov v. Bulgaria, no. 50222/99, § 53, 30 September 2004).

  The Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny where the applicant raises an arguable complaint of ill-treatment (see, mutatis mutandis, Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, § 32, and Avsar v. Turkey, cited above, § 283).

• EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04

  POPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  It reiterates that when an individual has been convicted following proceedings that have entailed breaches of the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention, a retrial or the reopening of the case, if requested, represents in principle an appropriate way of redressing the violation (see Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, § 210, ECHR 2005-IV, and Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 264, 13 July 2006).
• EGMR, 26.06.2008 - 15435/03

  SHULEPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  The Court notes in this connection that Article 413 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation provides for the reopening of criminal proceedings if a violation of the Convention has been established (see Shulepov v. Russia, no. 15435/03, § 46, 26 June 2008).

 
• EGMR, 13.06.2000 - 23531/94

  TIMURTAS c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  Furthermore, the investigation must be expedient (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 133 et seq., ECHR 2000-IV, and Timurtas v. Turkey, no. 23531/94, § 89, ECHR 2000-VI).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94

  AVSAR c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  The standard of proof relied upon by the Court is that "beyond reasonable doubt" (see Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 282, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 50222/99

  KRASTANOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  In respect of a person deprived of liberty, any recourse to physical force which has not been made strictly necessary by his own conduct diminishes human dignity and is in principle an infringement of the right set forth in Article 3 of the Convention (see Sheydayev v. Russia, no. 65859/01, § 59, 7 December 2006; Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 38, Series A no. 336; and Krastanov v. Bulgaria, no. 50222/99, § 53, 30 September 2004).
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

  SARBAN v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  The Court reiterates that persons in custody are in a vulnerable position and that the authorities are under a duty to protect their physical well-being (see Tarariyeva v. Russia, no. 4353/03, § 73, ECHR 2006-... ; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 54810/00

  Einsatz von Brechmitteln; Selbstbelastungsfreiheit (Schutzbereich; faires …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  The use of such evidence, obtained as a result of a violation of one of the core rights guaranteed by the Convention, raises serious issues as to the fairness of the proceedings (see Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, §§ 99 and 104, ECHR 2006-...; Göçmen v. Turkey, no. 72000/01, § 73, 17 October 2006; and Harutyunyan v. Armenia, no. 36549/03, § 63, ECHR 2007-...).
• EGMR, 17.10.2006 - 72000/01

  GÖÇMEN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 2807/04

  The use of such evidence, obtained as a result of a violation of one of the core rights guaranteed by the Convention, raises serious issues as to the fairness of the proceedings (see Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, §§ 99 and 104, ECHR 2006-...; Göçmen v. Turkey, no. 72000/01, § 73, 17 October 2006; and Harutyunyan v. Armenia, no. 36549/03, § 63, ECHR 2007-...).
• EGMR, 07.12.2006 - 65859/01

  SHEYDAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 14.12.2006 - 4353/03

  TARARIEVA c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 28.06.2007 - 36549/03

  Recht auf ein faires Strafverfahren (Beweisverwertungsverbot; Verwertungsverbot …
• EGMR, 22.09.1993 - 15473/89

  KLAAS c. ALLEMAGNE
• EGMR, 12.07.1988 - 10862/84

  SCHENK c. SUISSE

• EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 46956/09

  LYAPIN v. RUSSIA

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; and also Oleg Nikitin v. Russia, no. 36410/02, § 45, 9 October 2008; Gladyshev v. Russia, no. 2807/04, § 52, 30 July 2009; Alchagin v. Russia, no. 20212/05, § 53, 17 January 2012).
• EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 36552/05

  ZAYEV c. RUSSIE

  Pour illustrer ce point, le requérant cite de nombreux arrêts rendus par la Cour à ce sujet (Akoulinine et Babitch c. Russie, no 5742/02, § 52, 2 octobre 2008, Antipenkov c Russie, no 33470/03, §§ 67-69, 15 octobre 2009, Barabanchtchikov c. Russie, no 36220/02, § 61, 8 janvier 2009, Beloussov c. Russie, no 1748/02, § 55, 2 octobre 2008, Gladychev c. Russie, no 2807/04, § 64, 30 juillet 2009, Toporkov c. Russie, no 66688/01, § 53, 1er octobre 2009, et Vladimir Fedorov c. Russie, no 19223/04, § 72, 30 juillet 2009).
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 21062/07

  IGOSHIN c. RUSSIE

  Se référant aux arrêts Samoïlov c. Russie (no 64398/01, 2 octobre 2008) et Gladychev c. Russie (no 2807/04, 30 juillet 2009), le Gouvernement estime que la somme réclamée par le requérant est excessive.

 
• EGMR, 09.02.2016 - 27217/06

  ZINOVCHIK c. RUSSIE

  Se référant aux arrêts Samoïlov c. Russie, no 64398/01, 2 octobre 2008 et Gladychev c. Russie, no 2807/04, 30 juillet 2009, 1e Gouvernement que la somme réclamée par le requérant est excessive.
• EGMR, 30.04.2015 - 13810/04

  SHAMARDAKOV v. RUSSIA

  Dans ces conditions, la Cour considère que, indépendamment de l'influence que les déclarations initiales du requérant faites à la police à la suite du traitement inhumain et dégradant subi ont pu avoir sur l'issue de la procédure dirigée contre lui, leur maintien dans le dossier a privé d'équité cette procédure dans son ensemble (voir Jalloh, précité § 99 ; Haroutyounian, précité, § 63 ; Gladychev c. Russie, no 2807/04, § 79, 30 juillet 2009 ; Ryabtsev c. Russie, no 13642/06, §§ 93-94, 14 novembre 2013, et El Haski c. Belgique, no 649/08, § 85, 25 septembre 2012).
• EGMR, 13.11.2012 - 22362/06

  CUCU v. ROMANIA

  The Court reiterates that persons in custody are in a vulnerable position and that the authorities are under a duty to protect their physical well-being (see Gladyshev v. Russia, no. 2807/04, § 51, 30 July 2009; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• VG Düsseldorf, 20.04.2010 - 2 K 825/09

  Iran; Schah-Regime; Angehöriger; Sippenhaft

  vgl. amnesty international, Stellungnahme vom 18. Dezember 2000 - MDE13-00.078 - Deutsches Orient-Institut, Stellungnahmen vom 1. Dezember 2003 (498 und 502); ferner OVG NRW, Beschlüsse vom 16. April 1999 - 9 A 5338/98.A - und vom 10. Februar 2000 - 9 A 229/99.A ; VG Düsseldorf, Urteil vom 11. April 2006 - 2 K 2807/04.A - VG Stuttgart, Urteil vom 30. Juni 2008 - A 11 K 1399/08 -.
• EGMR, 21.06.2016 - 23559/07

  OLEYNIK c. RUSSIE

  Se référant aux arrêts Samoïlov c. Russie, no 64398/01, 2 octobre 2008 et Gladychev c. Russie, no 2807/04, 30 juillet 2009, 1e Gouvernement estime que la somme réclamée par le requérant est excessive.
• EGMR, 18.10.2011 - 38047/04

  SHUVALOV v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that persons in custody are in a vulnerable position and that the authorities are under a duty to protect their physical well-being (see Gladyshev v. Russia, no. 2807/04, § 51, 30 July 2009; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 20212/05

  ALCHAGIN v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that persons in custody are in a vulnerable position and that the authorities are under a duty to protect their physical well-being (see Gladyshev v. Russia, no. 2807/04, § 51, 30 July 2009; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 77, 4 October 2005; and Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX).
• EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 3937/03

  KONDRATISHKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 53373/14 (anhängig)

  ZHDAN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 11.12.2014 - 33469/06

  KHISMATULLIN v. RUSSIA