Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 01.03.2016 - 40025/10 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2016,2771) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
LAGUNOV v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-5 - Compensation) (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (3) Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 36760/06
STANEV v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2016 - 40025/10
The Court reiterates that the right to compensation under Article 5 § 5 of the Convention arises if a breach of one of the Article's other four paragraphs has been established, directly or in substance, either by the Court or by the domestic courts (see, among many other authorities, Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, § 182, ECHR 2012; Svetoslav Dimitrov v. Bulgaria, no. 55861/00, § 76, 7 February 2008; and Çağdaş Şahin v. Turkey, no. 28137/02, § 34, 11 April 2006). - EGMR, 26.07.2007 - 35082/04
MAKHMUDOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2016 - 40025/10
For a summary of the relevant provisions of Russian law, see Makhmudov v. Russia, no. 35082/04, §§ 47-48, 26 July 2007. - EGMR, 11.04.2006 - 28137/02
SAHIN ÇAGDAS v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2016 - 40025/10
The Court reiterates that the right to compensation under Article 5 § 5 of the Convention arises if a breach of one of the Article's other four paragraphs has been established, directly or in substance, either by the Court or by the domestic courts (see, among many other authorities, Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, § 182, ECHR 2012; Svetoslav Dimitrov v. Bulgaria, no. 55861/00, § 76, 7 February 2008; and Çağdaş Şahin v. Turkey, no. 28137/02, § 34, 11 April 2006).
- EGMR, 07.06.2018 - 9096/09
ABASHEV CONTRE LA RUSSIE ET 122 AUTRES AFFAIRES
40025/10. - EGMR, 18.10.2016 - 22965/06
ZHULIN v. RUSSIA
The Court further reiterates that, in the light of the prominent place that the right to liberty has in a democratic society, it has consistently rejected the application of the "no significant disadvantage" admissibility criterion in relation to complaints under Article 5 of the Convention (see Van Velden v. the Netherlands, no. 30666/08, §§ 33-39, 19 July 2011; Sýkora v. the Czech Republic, no. 23419/07, § 55, 22 November 2012; Bannikov v. Latvia, no. 19279/03, § 58, 11 June 2013; and Lagunov v. Russia, no. 40025/10, § 13, 1 March 2016). - EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 65367/16
ZELCS v. LATVIA
In the light of the prominent place that the right to liberty has in a democratic society, the Court has so far rejected the application of the "no significant disadvantage" admissibility criterion in relation to complaints under Article 5 of the Convention (see Van Velden v. the Netherlands, no. 30666/08, §§ 33-39, 19 July 2011; Sýkora v. the Czech Republic, no. 23419/07, § 56, 22 November 2012; Bannikov v. Latvia, no. 19279/03, § 58, 11 June 2013; Lagunov v. Russia [Committee], no. 40025/10, § 13, 1 March 2016; and Zhulin v. Russia [Committee], no. 22965/06, § 15, 18 October 2016).
dejure.org
Übersicht EGMR
Einloggen | Registrieren
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen. Falls Sie noch kein Benutzerkonto haben, können Sie sich in weniger als einer Minute eines kostenlos anlegen "Registrieren".
Externe Links öffnen jetzt in einem neuen Tab. Sie können dieses Verhalten auch auf Ihrer Einstellungsseite ändern.
Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 22118/10, 13080/12, 57780/12, 15448/13, 47020/12, 53229/13, 40025/10, 25799/14, 20286/12, 61151/13 |
Zitiervorschläge
EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 22118/10, 13080/12, 57780/12, 15448/13, 47020/12, 53229/13, 40025/10, 25799/14, 20286/12, 61151/13 (https://dejure.org/2016,4518)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 02.02.2016 - 22118/10, 13080/12, 57780/12, 15448/13, 47020/12, 53229/13, 40025/10, 25799/14, 20286/12, 61151/13 (https://dejure.org/2016,4518)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 02. Februar 2016 - 22118/10, 13080/12, 57780/12, 15448/13, 47020/12, 53229/13, 40025/10, 25799/14, 20286/12, 61151/13 (https://dejure.org/2016,4518)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2016,4518) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
DROBODKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Struck out of the list (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
DROBODKO v. RUSSIA and 9 other cases
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Zitiert selbst (5)
- KAG Münster, 18.01.2007 - 10/06
Abschluss eines beamtenähnlichen Arbeitsvertrages; Ersetzung der Zustimmung der …
Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 22118/10
10/06/2013. - EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 28953/03
SULWINSKA v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 22118/10
To this end, the Court has examined the declarations carefully in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Spółka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; and Sulwińska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03, 18 September 2007). - EGMR, 04.03.2008 - 18369/07
JOSIPOVIC v. SERBIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 22118/10
In any event, the Court's decision is without prejudice to any decision it might take to restore, pursuant to Article 37 § 2 of the Convention, the applications to its list of cases, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration (see Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008, and Aleksentseva and 28 Others v. Russia (dec.), nos. - EGMR, 25.10.2007 - 38971/06
KORSHUNOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 22118/10
The Court has found a violation of Article 5 § 5 of the Convention in a number of cases against Russia, in which it established that the Russian law, in its current state, did not provide the applicants with an enforceable right to compensation for the detention effected in contravention of provisions of Article 5 (see Abashev v. Russia, no. 9096/09, 27 June 2013, which concerned compensation for a period of unlawful detention in breach of Article 5 § 1; Korshunov v. Russia, no. 38971/06, 25 October 2007, which concerned compensation for an excessively long detention in breach of Article 5 § 3, and Makhmudov v. Russia, no. 35082/04, 26 July 2007, which concerned a refusal of compensation for unlawful detention in the administrative proceedings). - EGMR, 26.07.2007 - 35082/04
MAKHMUDOV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 22118/10
The Court has found a violation of Article 5 § 5 of the Convention in a number of cases against Russia, in which it established that the Russian law, in its current state, did not provide the applicants with an enforceable right to compensation for the detention effected in contravention of provisions of Article 5 (see Abashev v. Russia, no. 9096/09, 27 June 2013, which concerned compensation for a period of unlawful detention in breach of Article 5 § 1; Korshunov v. Russia, no. 38971/06, 25 October 2007, which concerned compensation for an excessively long detention in breach of Article 5 § 3, and Makhmudov v. Russia, no. 35082/04, 26 July 2007, which concerned a refusal of compensation for unlawful detention in the administrative proceedings).
dejure.org
Übersicht EGMR
Einloggen | Registrieren
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen. Falls Sie noch kein Benutzerkonto haben, können Sie sich in weniger als einer Minute eines kostenlos anlegen "Registrieren".
Externe Links öffnen jetzt in einem neuen Tab. Sie können dieses Verhalten auch auf Ihrer Einstellungsseite ändern.