Weitere Entscheidung unten: EGMR, 06.04.2000

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2002,22669
EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96 (https://dejure.org/2002,22669)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 17.01.2002 - 32967/96 (https://dejure.org/2002,22669)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 17. Januar 2002 - 32967/96 (https://dejure.org/2002,22669)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2002,22669) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

Verfahrensgang

 
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 ... (388)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

  • EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

    McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96
    The Court reiterates that the first sentence of Article 2, which ranks as one of the most fundamental provisions in the Convention and also enshrines one of the basic values of the democratic societies making up the Council of Europe (see, among other authorities, McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324, pp. 45-46, § 147), enjoins the State not only to refrain from the "intentional" taking of life, but also to take appropriate steps to safeguard the lives of those within its jurisdiction (see L.C.B. v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 9 June 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-III, p. 1403, § 36).
  • EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

    MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96
    Even if the Convention does not as such guarantee a right to have criminal proceedings instituted against third parties, the Court has said on a number of occasions that the effective judicial system required by Article 2 may, and under certain circumstances must, include recourse to the criminal law (see, among other authorities, Kılıç v. Turkey, no. 22492/93, § 62, ECHR 2000-III, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 85, ECHR 2000-III).
  • EGMR, 04.05.2000 - 45305/99

    POWELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96
    They also require an effective independent judicial system to be set up so that the cause of death of patients in the care of the medical profession, whether in the public or the private sector, can be determined and those responsible made accountable (see, among authorities, Erikson v. Italy (dec.), no. 37900/97, 26 October 1999; and Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V; see also Isıltan v. Turkey, no. 20948/92, Commission decision of 22 May 1995, DR 81-B, p. 35).
     
  • EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22492/93

    KILIÇ v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96
    Even if the Convention does not as such guarantee a right to have criminal proceedings instituted against third parties, the Court has said on a number of occasions that the effective judicial system required by Article 2 may, and under certain circumstances must, include recourse to the criminal law (see, among other authorities, Kılıç v. Turkey, no. 22492/93, § 62, ECHR 2000-III, and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, § 85, ECHR 2000-III).
  • EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 34256/96

    DI MAURO c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96
    Despite the defects of the Italian judicial system, which it is to be hoped the recent Pinto law will help to remedy domestically, personally I have always been opposed to resorting to a sort of presumption of a violation of Article 6 that would lead to complaints of this type being upheld "automatically" (I refer on this subject to my dissenting opinion annexed to Di Mauro v. Italy [GC], no. 34256/96, ECHR 1999-V).
  • EGMR, 26.10.1999 - 37900/97

    ERIKSON v. ITALY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96
    They also require an effective independent judicial system to be set up so that the cause of death of patients in the care of the medical profession, whether in the public or the private sector, can be determined and those responsible made accountable (see, among authorities, Erikson v. Italy (dec.), no. 37900/97, 26 October 1999; and Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V; see also Isıltan v. Turkey, no. 20948/92, Commission decision of 22 May 1995, DR 81-B, p. 35).
  • EKMR, 22.05.1995 - 20948/92

    ISILTAN contre la TURQUIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96
    They also require an effective independent judicial system to be set up so that the cause of death of patients in the care of the medical profession, whether in the public or the private sector, can be determined and those responsible made accountable (see, among authorities, Erikson v. Italy (dec.), no. 37900/97, 26 October 1999; and Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000-V; see also Isıltan v. Turkey, no. 20948/92, Commission decision of 22 May 1995, DR 81-B, p. 35).
  • EGMR, 04.12.2003 - 39272/98

    M.C. c. BULGARIE

    Such a positive obligation cannot be considered in principle to be limited solely to cases of ill-treatment by State agents (see, mutatis mutandis, Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, ECHR 2002-I).
  • EGMR, 13.02.2003 - 41340/98

    Refah Partisi (Wohlfahrtspartei)

    Those obligations relate not only to any interference that may result from acts or omissions imputable to agents of the State or occurring in public establishments but also to interference imputable to private individuals within non-State entities (see, for example, with regard to the State's obligation to make private hospitals adopt appropriate measures to protect life, Calvelli and Ciglio [GC], no. 32967/96, § 49, ECHR 2002-I).
  • EGMR, 04.07.2019 - 62903/15

    Amtshaftungsklage gegen Österreich: Behörden reagierten ausreichend auf häusliche …

    It requires the State not only to refrain from the "intentional" taking of life, but also to take appropriate steps to safeguard the lives of those within its jurisdiction (see Fernandes de Oliveira v. Portugal, cited above, § 104; Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 48, ECHR 2002-I).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 32967/96   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2000,27058
EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 32967/96 (https://dejure.org/2000,27058)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 06.04.2000 - 32967/96 (https://dejure.org/2000,27058)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 06. April 2000 - 32967/96 (https://dejure.org/2000,27058)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2000,27058) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

Verfahrensgang

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht