Neue Kooperation: dejure.org × Doctrine bringen KI-Power für Aktenanalyse, Recherche und Texterstellung. Doctrine entdecken
×

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2009,20864
EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02 (https://dejure.org/2009,20864)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 09.06.2009 - 33401/02 (https://dejure.org/2009,20864)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 09. Juni 2009 - 33401/02 (https://dejure.org/2009,20864)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2009,20864) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    OPUZ v. TURKEY

    Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 14, Art. 14+2, Art. 14+3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Preliminary objection dismissed (six month period) Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Violation of Art. 2 Violation of Art. 3 Violation of Art. 14+2 Violation of Art. 14+3 Non-pecuniary damage - award ...

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    OPUZ c. TURQUIE

    Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 14, Art. 14+2, Art. 14+3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Exception préliminaire rejetée (délai de six mois) Exception préliminaire jointe au fond et rejetée (non-épuisement des voies de recours internes) Violation de l'art. 2 Violation de l'art. 3 Violation de l'art. 14+2 Violation de l'art. 14+3 Préjudice moral - ...

  • milo.bamf.de

    Türkei: Der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (EGMR) hat in einem wegweisenden Urteil für alle Europaratsländer die häusliche Gewalt gegen Frauen in der Türkei verurteilt (Az.: 33401/02). Die Regierung in Ankara muss nach dem Urteil vom 09.06.2009 einer Frau 30.000 Euro ...

  • juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse (4)

Sonstiges (2)

Papierfundstellen

  • DÖV 2009, 679
 
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 ... (170)Zitiert selbst (18)

  • EGMR, 17.02.2005 - 45558/99
    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    Moreover, the Court reiterates that, in some instances, the national authorities' interference with the private or family life of the individuals might be necessary in order to protect the health and rights of others or to prevent commission of criminal acts (see, K.A. and A.D. v. Belgium, no. 42758/98 and 45558/99, § 81, 17 February 2005).
  • EGMR, 14.05.2002 - 22876/93

    SEMSI ONEN v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    Accordingly, the Court joins these questions to the merits and will examine them under Articles 2, 3 and 14 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Semsi Önen v. Turkey, no. 22876/93, § 77, 14 May 2002).
  • EGMR, 13.11.2007 - 57325/00
    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    The relevant principles 183. In its recent ruling in the case D.H. and Others v. Czech Republic ([GC], no. 57325/00, 13 November 2007, §§ 175-180) the Court laid down the following principles on the issue of discrimination: "175.
  • EGMR, 29.04.1999 - 25088/94

    Chassagnou u.a. ./. Frankreich

    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    As to the burden of proof in this sphere, the Court has established that once the applicant has shown a difference in treatment, it is for the Government to show that it was justified (see, among other authorities, Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95, §§ 91-92, ECHR 1999-III; and Timishev, cited above, § 57).
  • EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    Applicable principles 158. The Court reiterates that ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this minimum is relative: it depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the nature and context of the treatment, its duration, its physical and mental effects and, in some instances, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 30, Series A no. 247-C).
  • EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

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

    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    In certain circumstances, where the events in issue lie wholly, or in large part, within the exclusive knowledge of the authorities, 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 Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 111, ECHR 2002-IV).
  • EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96
    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    2) The effectiveness of the criminal investigation into the killing of the applicant's mother 150. The Court reiterates that the positive obligations laid down in the first sentence of Article 2 of the Convention also require by implication that an efficient and independent judicial system should be set in place by which the cause of a murder can be established and the guilty parties punished (see, mutatis mutandis, Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy, [GC], no. 32967/96, ECHR 2002, § 51).
  • EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 24746/94

    HUGH JORDAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    that a general policy or measure that has disproportionately prejudicial effects on a particular group may be considered discriminatory notwithstanding that it is not specifically aimed at that group (see Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, § 154, 4 May 2001; and Hoogendijk v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 58461/00, 6 January 2005), and that discrimination potentially contrary to the Convention may result from a de facto situation (see Zarb Adami v. Malta, no. 17209/02, § 76, ECHR 2006-...).
  • EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23657/94

    ÇAKICI v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    A requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition is implicit in the context of an effective investigation within the meaning of Article 2 of the Convention (see Yasa v. Turkey, 2 September 1998, §§ 102-104, Reports 1998-VI; Çakici v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, §§ 80-87 and 106, ECHR 1999-IV).
  • EGMR, 11.06.2002 - 36042/97

    WILLIS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
    The Court has established in its case-law that discrimination means treating differently, without an objective and reasonable justification, persons in relevantly similar situations (Willis v. the United Kingdom, no. 36042/97, § 48, ECHR 2002-IV; and Okpisz v. Germany, no. 59140/00, § 33, 25 October 2005).
  • EGMR, 19.03.1991 - 11069/84
  • EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97

    ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA

  • EGMR, 20.06.2006 - 17209/02

    ZARB ADAMI c. MALTE

  • EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94

    AVSAR c. TURQUIE

  • EGMR, 24.04.2003 - 24351/94

    AKTAS v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 20.12.2007 - 7888/03

    NIKOLOVA AND VELICHKOVA v. BULGARIA

  • EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 7510/04

    KONTROVA c. SLOVAQUIE

  • EGMR, 26.11.2002 - 33218/96

    E. AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  • EGMR, 14.12.2023 - 59433/18

    EGMR zu den Rechten von Beamten: Lehrer dürften nicht streiken

    In accordance with Article 32 of the Convention, the Court provides the final authoritative interpretation of the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of the Convention (see Juszczyszyn v. Poland, no. 35599/20, § 208, 6 October 2022, and Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, § 163, ECHR 2009).
  • EGMR, 08.11.2016 - 18030/11

    MAGYAR HELSINKI BIZOTTSÁG v. HUNGARY

    Being made up of a set of rules and principles that are accepted by the vast majority of States, the common international or domestic-law standards of European States reflect a reality that the Court cannot disregard when it is called upon to clarify the scope of a Convention provision (see Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, § 184, ECHR 2009).
  • EGMR, 22.10.2018 - 35553/12

    Präventivhaft: EGMR lässt Polizei Spielraum im Umgang mit Hooligans

    Thus, for example, in other contexts, States are required under Article 3 to take measures designed to ensure that individuals within their jurisdiction are not subjected to illtreatment, including such treatment administered by private individuals (see, inter alia, A. v. the United Kingdom, 23 September 1998, § 22, Reports 1998-VI; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 149-50, ECHR 2003-XII; and Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, § 159, ECHR 2009).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
dejure.org Übersicht EGMR
dejure.org nutzen ohne Ablenkung
Werbung abschalten. Jetzt buchen! Keine automatische Verlängerung.
Info zum PUR-Angebot
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht