Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KARAGÖZ AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Art. 3, Art. 13 MRK
  Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) Violation of Art. 13 (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 14352/05

  As to the seriousness of the treatment in question, the Court reiterates that, under its case-law in this sphere (see, among other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, §§ 96-97, ECHR 1999-V), in order to determine whether a particular form of ill-treatment should be qualified as torture, it must have regard to the distinction, embodied in Article 3, between this notion and that of inhuman or degrading treatment.
• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 57834/00

  KABLAN contre la TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 14352/05

  A description of the relevant domestic law at the material time can be found in Batı and Others v. Turkey (nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, ECHR 2004-IV), Okkalı v. Turkey (no. 52067/99, § 71, ECHR 2006-...) and Zeynep Özcan v. Turkey (no. 45906/99, 20 February 2007).
• EGMR, 17.10.2006 - 52067/99

  OKKALI c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 14352/05

  A description of the relevant domestic law at the material time can be found in Batı and Others v. Turkey (nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, ECHR 2004-IV), Okkalı v. Turkey (no. 52067/99, § 71, ECHR 2006-...) and Zeynep Özcan v. Turkey (no. 45906/99, 20 February 2007).
• EGMR, 20.02.2007 - 45906/99

  ZYNEP OZCAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 14352/05

  A description of the relevant domestic law at the material time can be found in Batı and Others v. Turkey (nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, ECHR 2004-IV), Okkalı v. Turkey (no. 52067/99, § 71, ECHR 2006-...) and Zeynep Özcan v. Turkey (no. 45906/99, 20 February 2007).
• EGMR, 03.06.2004 - 33097/96

  BATI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 14352/05

  A description of the relevant domestic law at the material time can be found in Batı and Others v. Turkey (nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, ECHR 2004-IV), Okkalı v. Turkey (no. 52067/99, § 71, ECHR 2006-...) and Zeynep Özcan v. Turkey (no. 45906/99, 20 February 2007).

• EGMR - 38484/05

  [ENG]

  38484/05 and 38513/05 by Haydar BALLIKAYA and Bekir ÇADIRCI against Turkey lodged on 12 October 2005 and 7 October 2005.

  Mr Haydar Ballikaya ("the first applicant"), who introduced application no 38484/05, and Mr Bekir Çadirci ("the second applicant"), who introduced application no 38513/05, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1965 and 1974 respectively and live in Istanbul.

  In this connection the second applicant (application no 38513/05) also invoked Article 6 of the Convention.

  The second applicant (application no 38513/05) further asserted that he had been denied the right to seek compensation before the civil courts as the criminal proceedings against the police officers had been dismissed on account of statutory time limitations.

  Did the applicant in application no. 38513/05 have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy with respect to his civil claim for damages for his complaint under Article 3, as required by Article 13 of the Convention (see Assenov and Others v. Bulgaria, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII, § 117)?.

  Both parties are further requested to submit the medical report of the Forensic Medicine Institute issued on 19 December 2001 concerning the applicant in application no. 38513/05.

• EGMR, 07.07.2022 - 32715/19

  M.S. c. ITALIE

  La Cour a ainsi conclu à la violation des garanties procédurales de l'article 3 dans des affaires où la prescription avait joué parce que les autorités n'avaient pas agi avec la promptitude et la diligence requises (voir, entre autres, Bati et autres c. Turquie, nos 33097/96 et 57834/00, §§ 97 et 145-147, CEDH 2004-IV (extraits), Abdülsamet Yaman, précité, § 59, Yesil et Sevim c. Turquie, no 34738/04, §§ 38-42, 5 juin 2007, Erdogan Yilmaz et autres c. Turquie, no 19374/03, § 57, 14 octobre 2008, Erdal Aslan c. Turquie, nos 25060/02 et 1705/03, §§ 75-79, 2 décembre 2008, Paduret c. Moldova, no 33134/03, § 75, 5 janvier 2010, Karagöz et autres c. Turquie, nos 14352/05 et 2 autres, §§ 53-55, 13 juillet 2010, Savin c. Ukraine, no 34725/08, §§ 70-71, 16 février 2012, Ugur c. Turquie, no 37308/05, § 105, 13 janvier 2015, et Barovov c. Russie, no 9183/09, § 42, 15 juin 2021).