Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GOLUBENKO v. UKRAINE

  Art. 3, Art. 35 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 36327/06
• EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06
• EGMR - 36327/06

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (12)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 02.12.2004 - 4672/02

  FARBTUHS c. LETTONIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  Although such deterioration does not in itself imply a violation of Article 3, it may, however, be considered to be a characteristic element of the overall conditions of detention (see, for example, Valasinas, cited above, § 54, and Farbtuhs v. Latvia, no. 4672/02, § 57, 2 December 2004).
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

  SARBAN v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  A lack of appropriate medical care may amount to treatment contrary to Article 3 (see Ä°lhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, § 87, ECHR 2000-VII, and Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 90, 4 October 2005).
• EGMR, 15.11.2007 - 30983/02

  GRISHIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  It further held that it was "prepared to accept that in principle the resources of medical facilities within the [penal] system are limited compared to those of civil[ian] clinics" (see Grishin v. Russia, no. 30983/02, § 76, 15 November 2007).

• EGMR, 15.09.2011 - 23136/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  Furthermore, the Court has never found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the conditions of detention in that particular prison, from which it could draw inferences in favour of the applicant's allegations in the present case (like, for example, in the case of Izzetov v. Ukraine no. 23136/04, § 42, 15 September 2011), where the Court found a violation of Article 3 as regards the conditions of detention in Simferopol SIZO, mainly because it had already found violations on that account in other previous cases).
• EGMR, 15.07.2002 - 47095/99

  Russland, Haftbedingungen, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  In this connection, the Court notes that it has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of unsatisfactory sanitary conditions coupled with a number of other inadequate conditions such as the lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see, among many others, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., 15 July 2002; Testa v. Croatia, no. 20877/04, § 60, 12 July 2007; and Generalov v. Russia, no. 24325/03, §§ 12-14 and 112, 9 July 2009).
• EGMR, 12.07.2007 - 20877/04

  TESTA v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  In this connection, the Court notes that it has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of unsatisfactory sanitary conditions coupled with a number of other inadequate conditions such as the lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see, among many others, Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., 15 July 2002; Testa v. Croatia, no. 20877/04, § 60, 12 July 2007; and Generalov v. Russia, no. 24325/03, §§ 12-14 and 112, 9 July 2009).
• EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 40907/98

  Griechenland, Ausweisung, Abschiebung, Abschiebungshaft, Haftbedingungen, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  As the Court has held in its case-law, when assessing conditions of detention, account has to be taken of the cumulative effects of those conditions, as well as the specific allegations made by the applicant (see Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 46, ECHR 2001-II).
• EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 30138/02

  NURMAGOMEDOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  The Court notes that, as opposed to pre-trial detention facilities and high-security prisons (where inmates are confined to their cell for most of the day), when assessing the issue of overcrowding in post-trial detention facilities such as correctional colonies, it considered that the personal space in the dormitory should be viewed in the context of the applicable regime, providing for a wider freedom of movement enjoyed by detainees in correctional colonies during daytime and their unobstructed access to natural light and air (see, for example, Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 107, ECHR 2001-VIII, and Nurmagomedov v. Russia (dec.), no. 30138/02, 16 September 2004).
• EGMR, 14.03.2013 - 16133/08

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  In the absence of this information, even where it was established that there had been no heating system in a prison at all, the Court did not consider this fact alone to raise any issues under Article 3 (see Insanov v. Azerbaijan, no. 16133/08, § 125, 14 March 2013).
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 1555/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.11.2013 - 36327/06

  The Court has previously found it unacceptable that anyone should be detained in conditions involving a lack of adequate protection against extreme temperatures (see Mathew v. the Netherlands, no. 24919/03, § 214, ECHR 2005-IX, and Zakharkin v. Russia, no. 1555/04, § 125, 10 June 2010).
• EGMR, 16.05.2013 - 13371/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 09.07.2009 - 24325/03

  GENERALOV v. RUSSIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen