Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  A.H. AND J.K. v. CYPRUS

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 4 MRK
  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Review of lawfulness of detention) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention Article 5-1-f - Expulsion) No violation of Article 5 - Right to ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 41903/10, 41911/10
• EGMR, 06.12.2018 - 41903/10

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (7)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 24.06.2010 - 30141/04

  [FRE]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 41903/10

  The Court reiterates in this connection that in proceedings originating in an individual application it has to confine itself, as far as possible, to an examination of the concrete case before it (see Schalk and Kopf v. Austria, no. 30141/04, § 103, ECHR 2010).
• EGMR, 27.07.2010 - 24340/08

  Abschiebungshaft, Malta, Rechtsweggarantie, effektiver Rechtsschutz, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 41903/10

  Consequently, the applicants could have been kept in detention for an indeterminate period pending the determination by the Court of their application (see, mutatis mutandis, Louled Massoud v. Malta, no. 24340/08, § 71, 27 July 2010).
• EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

  SARBAN v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 41903/10

  Furthermore, there had been no element of urgency in the cases nor had such an issue been raised during the proceedings (in contrast to Sarban v. Moldova (no. 3456/05, §§ 121-122, 4 October 2005 where the applicant had, inter alia, based his habeas corpus request on his poor state of health and absence of medical care in the remand centre).

• EGMR, 18.04.2013 - 67474/11

  AZIMOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 41903/10

  Detention should still be lawful and not arbitrary (see Azimov v. Russia, no. 67474/11, § 169, 18 April 2013).
• EGMR, 28.10.1999 - 40772/98

  PANCENKO v. LATVIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 41903/10

  The Court points out, inter alia, that the Convention does not guarantee, as such, socio-economic rights such as the right to work (see, among other authorities, K. v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 33403/11, § 46, 25 September 2012 and Pancenko v. Latvia (dec.), no. 40772/98, 28 October 1999)].
• EGMR, 18.09.2012 - 17455/11

  UMIROV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 41903/10

  They relied on a number of cases in which they pointed out that the Court had not found a violation of Article 5 (1) (f) with regard to longer periods of detention (Al Husin v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 3727/08, 7 February 2012; Umirov v. Russia, no. 17455/11, 18 September 2012, and Al Hanchi v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 48205/09, 15 November 2010).
• EGMR, 15.11.2011 - 48205/09

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 41903/10

  They relied on a number of cases in which they pointed out that the Court had not found a violation of Article 5 (1) (f) with regard to longer periods of detention (Al Husin v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 3727/08, 7 February 2012; Umirov v. Russia, no. 17455/11, 18 September 2012, and Al Hanchi v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 48205/09, 15 November 2010).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen