Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PIRUZYAN v. ARMENIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07
• EGMR, 10.03.2016 - 33376/07
• EGMR - 33376/07

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (19)

• EGMR, 28.06.2007 - 36549/03

  Recht auf ein faires Strafverfahren (Beweisverwertungsverbot; Verwertungsverbot …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  The Court notes in respect of the alleged food and travel expenses that these do not concern any pecuniary loss incurred by the applicant and are expenses allegedly borne by his family members, who were not applicants in the present case and cannot therefore be regarded as persons directly affected by the violations found (see Harutyunyan v. Armenia, no. 36549/03, § 71, ECHR 2007-III).
• EGMR, 25.10.2007 - 4493/04

  LEBEDEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  In that case, the Court held that it was of little relevance whether the domestic court decided on an application for release lodged by the defence or a request for detention introduced by the prosecution (see Lebedev v. Russia, no. 4493/04, § 72, 25 October 2007).
• EGMR, 30.03.1989 - 10444/83

  LAMY c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  Equality of arms is not ensured if counsel is denied access to those documents in the investigation file which are essential in order effectively to challenge the lawfulness of his client's detention (see Lamy v. Belgium, 30 March 1989, § 29, Series A no. 151; Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II; and Garcia Alva v. Germany, no. 23541/94, § 39, 13 February 2001).

 
• EGMR, 06.07.2006 - 56552/00

  TELECKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  In reaching that conclusion the Court referred to a number of cases in which it had decided that the extension of the applicant's detention by a court at the request of the prosecution also attracted the guarantees of Article 5 § 4 (see Grauzinis v. Lithuania, no. 37975/97, § 33, 10 October 2000; Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, §§ 125 et seq., ECHR 2000-XI; and Telecki v Poland (dec.) no. 56552/00, 3 July 2003).
• EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 23541/94

  Recht auf Akteneinsicht bei der Haftprüfung (wesentliche Verfahrensakten; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  Equality of arms is not ensured if counsel is denied access to those documents in the investigation file which are essential in order effectively to challenge the lawfulness of his client's detention (see Lamy v. Belgium, 30 March 1989, § 29, Series A no. 151; Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II; and Garcia Alva v. Germany, no. 23541/94, § 39, 13 February 2001).
• EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 37975/97

  GRAUZINIS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  In reaching that conclusion the Court referred to a number of cases in which it had decided that the extension of the applicant's detention by a court at the request of the prosecution also attracted the guarantees of Article 5 § 4 (see Grauzinis v. Lithuania, no. 37975/97, § 33, 10 October 2000; Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, §§ 125 et seq., ECHR 2000-XI; and Telecki v Poland (dec.) no. 56552/00, 3 July 2003).
• EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95

  WLOCH v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  In reaching that conclusion the Court referred to a number of cases in which it had decided that the extension of the applicant's detention by a court at the request of the prosecution also attracted the guarantees of Article 5 § 4 (see Grauzinis v. Lithuania, no. 37975/97, § 33, 10 October 2000; Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, §§ 125 et seq., ECHR 2000-XI; and Telecki v Poland (dec.) no. 56552/00, 3 July 2003).
• EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 38822/97

  Recht auf Freiheit und Sicherheit (zur Wahrnehmung richterlicher Aufgaben …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  The Court reiterates that, according to its case-law, Article 5 § 4 enshrines, as does Article 6 § 1, the right of access to a court, which can only be subject to reasonable limitations that do not impair its very essence (see Shishkov v. Bulgaria, no. 38822/97, § 82-90, ECHR 2003-I (extracts), and Bochev v. Bulgaria, no. 73481/01, § 70, 13 November 2008).
• EGMR, 28.10.1998 - 24760/94

  ASSENOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  In order to comply with the rule, normal recourse should be had by an applicant to remedies which are available and sufficient to afford redress in respect of the breaches alleged (see, among other authorities, Assenov and Others v. Bulgaria no. 24760/94, § 85, ECHR 1999-VIII).
• EGMR, 10.11.1969 - 1602/62

  Stögmüller ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 33376/07

  The Convention case-law has developed four basic acceptable reasons for detaining a person before judgment when that person is suspected of having committed an offence: the risk that the accused would fail to appear for trial (see Stögmüller v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 15, Series A no. 9); the risk that the accused, if released, would take action to prejudice the administration of justice (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 14, Series A no. 7) or commit further offences (see Matznetter v. Austria, 10 November 1969, § 9, Series A no. 10) or cause public disorder (see Letellier, cited above, § 51).
• EGMR, 12.12.1991 - 12718/87

  CLOOTH v. BELGIUM
• EGMR, 19.06.2001 - 39360/98

  S.B.C. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64

  Wemhoff ./. Deutschland
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 48183/99
• EGMR, 08.02.2000 - 32819/96

  CABALLERO v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 10.11.1969 - 2178/64

  Matznetter ./. Österreich
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

  Neumeister ./. Österreich
• EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90

  YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY