Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NIKOLOVA v. BULGARIA (No. 2)

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 5-4 Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - financial award Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 04.09.2003 - 40896/98
• EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 40896/98
• EGMR, 06.12.2012 - 40896/98

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Zitiert selbst (4)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 06.06.2000 - 33644/96

  CESKY v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 40896/98

  Concerning the claim for pecuniary damages, the Court considers that there is a certain causal link between the violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention found and the amount claimed by the applicant to compensate for her loss of earnings (see Ceský v. the Czech Republic, no. 33644/96, § 91, 6 June 2000).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Ableitung einer allgemeinen Verpflichtung zur Entlassung eines …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 40896/98

  On the latter point, what was at stake for the applicant has also to be taken into account (see Portington v. Greece, judgment of 23 September 1998, Reports 1998-VI, p. 2630, § 21 and Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 124, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 40896/98

  Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 152 and 153, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 40896/98

  The Court reiterates that the remedy required by Article 5 § 4 must be of a judicial nature, which implies that the person concerned should have access to a court and the opportunity to be heard either in person or, where necessary, through some form of representation, failing which she will not have been afforded the fundamental guarantees of procedure applied in matters of deprivation of liberty (see Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, p. 24, § 60).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 07.11.2013 - 43165/10

  [FRE]

  Therefore, and in the absence of any comments by the parties on the matter, the Court accepts that the applicant's house arrest amounted to a deprivation of liberty within the meaning of Article 5 of the Convention (see Vachev v. Bulgaria, no. 42987/98, § 62, ECHR 2004-VIII (extracts); Nikolova v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 40896/98, § 60, 30 September 2004; N.C. v. Italy, no. 24952/94, § 33, 11 January 2001; and Bárkányi v. Hungary, no. 37214/05, § 27, 30 June 2009) for the purposes set out in sub-paragraph (f) of that Article.
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 9190/03

  BECCIEV v. MOLDOVA

  The Court considers that there is a certain causal link between the violation of Articles 5 § 3 and 5 § 4 of the Convention found and the sum claimed by the applicant to compensate for his loss of earnings (see Ceský v. the Czech Republic, no. 33644/96, § 91, 6 June 2000; Nikolova v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 40896/98, § 94, 30 September 2004).
• EGMR, 16.12.2014 - 23755/07

  Buzadji v. Republic of Moldova

  It recalls that it has considered in the past house arrest to constitute "deprivation of liberty" within the meaning of Article 5 of the Convention (see Nikolova v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 40896/98, § 60, 30 September 2004; Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, § 63, 28 November 2002 and Mancini v. Italy, no. 44955/98, § 17, ECHR 2001-IX).
• EGMR, 10.07.2007 - 39806/05

  PALADI v. MOLDOVA

  Since the applicant's detention had no legal basis as of 22 October 2004, he is entitled to recover his salary for the entire period of that unlawful detention (see Ceský v. the Czech Republic, no. 33644/96, § 91, 6 June 2000; Nikolova v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 40896/98, § 94, 30 September 2004; Becciev v. Moldova, no. 9190/03, § 81, 4 October 2005).
• EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 33529/11

  [ENG]

  In the case of a person whose detention falls within the ambit of Article 5 § 1 (c), a hearing is required (see Nikolova v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 40896/98, § 58, 30 September 2004; Sanchez-Reisse v. Switzerland, 21 October 1986, § 51, Series A no. 107; and Kampanis v. Greece, 13 July 1995, § 47, Series A no. 318-B).

Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NIKOLOVA v. BULGARIA

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  Partly admissible Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 04.09.2003 - 40896/98
• EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 40896/98
• EGMR, 06.12.2012 - 40896/98