Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ASSOCIATION FOR THE DEFENCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN ROMANIA - HELSINKI COMMITTEE ON BEHALF OF IONEL GARCEA v. ROMANIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 34, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies) Preliminary objection dismissed (Article 34 - Locus standi) Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) No ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 2959/11

  The Court refers to the general principles concerning medical assistance to detainees, set out in its previous case-law (see, amongst many other authorities, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-XI; Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, ECHR 2001-III; Rivière v. France, no. 33834/03, §§ 59-63, 11 July 2006; and Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu, cited above, §§ 130-33).
• EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95

  PEERS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 2959/11

  The Court refers to the general principles concerning medical assistance to detainees, set out in its previous case-law (see, amongst many other authorities, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-XI; Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, ECHR 2001-III; Rivière v. France, no. 33834/03, §§ 59-63, 11 July 2006; and Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu, cited above, §§ 130-33).
• EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 33834/03

  RIVIERE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 2959/11

  The Court refers to the general principles concerning medical assistance to detainees, set out in its previous case-law (see, amongst many other authorities, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-XI; Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, ECHR 2001-III; Rivière v. France, no. 33834/03, §§ 59-63, 11 July 2006; and Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu, cited above, §§ 130-33).
• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 37554/06

  ROSIORU c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.03.2015 - 2959/11

  The APADOR-CH relied, among other authorities, on Predica v. Romania (no. 42344/07, 7 June 2011); Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom (no. 24746/94, ECHR 2001-III (extracts)); and Rosioru v. Romania, (no. 37554/06, 10 January 2012).

• EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 13431/07

  FRANCESCO QUATTRONE c. ITALIE

  L'obligation de motivation s'applique aussi à la condamnation aux frais et dépens (The Association for the Defence of Human Rights c. Roumanie (déc.), no 2959/11, 22 novembre 2011) et aux amendes imposées en raison du caractère abusif du recours (G.L. c. Italie, no 15384/89, décision de la Commission du 9 mai 1994, Décisions et rapports (DR) 77-A, p. 5).
• EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 71776/12

  N.TS. AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

  Applications lodged by individuals or associations on behalf of the victim or victims have thus been declared admissible even though no valid form of authority has been presented (see Ilhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, §§ 53-55, ECHR 2000-VII; Y.F. v. Turkey, no. 24209/94, § 29, ECHR 2003-IX; Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu, cited above, § 103; see also Association for the Defence of Human Rights in Romania - Helsinki Committee on behalf of Ionel Garcea v. Romania, no. 2959/11, §§ 42-46, 24 March 2015).
• EGMR, 20.09.2016 - 12987/15

  KONDRULIN v. RUSSIA

  The Court considered that to find otherwise would amount to preventing such serious allegations of a violation of the Convention from being examined at an international level, with the risk that a respondent State might escape accountability under the Convention (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu, cited above, § 112, and Association for the Defence of Human Rights in Romania - Helsinki Committee on behalf of Ionel Garcea v. Romania, no. 2959/11, § 42, 24 March 2015).
• EGMR, 26.04.2016 - 39496/14

  N. AND M. v. RUSSIA

  Secondly, the present case was similar to the cases of Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania ([GC], no. 47848/08, ECHR 2014) and Association for the Defence of Human Rights in Romania - Helsinki Committee on behalf of Ionel Garcea v. Romania (no. 2959/11, 24 March 2015), in which the Court held that in exceptional circumstances and in cases involving allegations of a serious nature it should be open to associations to represent victims in the absence of a power of attorney, and notwithstanding that the victim may have died before the application was lodged with the Court.