Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ARSKAYA v. UKRAINE

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Preliminary objection dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies) Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations) ...

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Arskaya v. Ukraine

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 04.10.2011 - 45076/05
• EGMR, 05.12.2013 - 45076/05

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 31322/07

  HAAS c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2013 - 45076/05

  The Court has therefore held that this Article obliges the national authorities to prevent an individual from taking his or her own life if the decision has not been taken freely and with full understanding of what is involved (see Haas v. Switzerland, no. 31322/07, § 54, ECHR 2011).
• EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02

  Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2013 - 45076/05

  In the sphere of medical treatment, the refusal to accept a particular treatment might, inevitably, lead to a fatal outcome, yet the imposition of medical treatment without the consent of a mentally competent adult patient would interfere with a person's physical integrity in a manner capable of engaging the rights protected under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention (see Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 63, ECHR 2002-III).
• EGMR, 08.07.2004 - 53924/00

  Schutz des ungeborenen Lebens durch EMRK - Schwangerschaftsabbruch nach …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2013 - 45076/05

  Disciplinary measures may also be envisaged (see Vo v. France [GC], no. 53924/00, § 90, ECHR 2004-VIII, with further references).

 
• EGMR, 20.12.2004 - 50385/99

  MAKARATZIS c. GRECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2013 - 45076/05

  Indeed, the Court has in the past examined the quality of legal frameworks in order to determine whether the right to life has been appropriately protected "by law" (see, for example, Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, § 62, ECHR 2004-XI).
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 302/02

  JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES OF MOSCOW AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2013 - 45076/05

  To the extent that the considerations of the board of inquiry and the Head Doctor of the hospital suggest that it was the applicant's son who was responsible for the fatal outcome because he repeatedly refused medical treatment, the Court notes that the freedom to accept or refuse specific medical treatment is vital to the principles of self-determination and personal autonomy (see Jehovah's Witnesses of Moscow v. Russia, no. 302/02, § 136, 10 June 2010).
• EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96

  CALVELLI ET CIGLIO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.12.2013 - 45076/05

  They also require an effective independent judicial system to be set up so that the cause of death of patients in the care of the medical profession, whether in the public or the private sector, can be determined and those responsible made accountable (see, among authorities, Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 49, ECHR 2002-I).

• BVerfG, 26.07.2016 - 1 BvL 8/15

  Die Beschränkung ärztlicher Zwangsbehandlung auf untergebrachte Betreute ist mit …

  Trifft eine Person aber die Entscheidung nicht freien Willens und bei vollem Verständnis der Umstände, nimmt der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte eine aus Art. 2 EMRK abgeleitete Verpflichtung des Staates an, diese Person davon abzuhalten, ihr Leben zu riskieren (vgl. EGMR (GK), Lambert v. France, Urteil vom 5. Juni 2015, Nr. 46043/14, § 140; EGMR, Haas v. Switzerland, Urteil vom 20. Januar 2011, Nr. 31322/07, § 54; EGMR, Arskaya v. Ukraine, Urteil vom 5. Dezember 2013, Nr. 45076/05, § 69 f.).

  Lehnt ein Patient eine medizinisch indizierte Behandlung ab, mit der Folge, dass sein Leben dadurch gefährdet wird, hält der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte den Staat für verpflichtet, hinreichende Vorkehrungen zu treffen, damit die behandelnden Ärzte beim Vorliegen von Indizien, die auf einen fehlenden freien Willen hindeuten, die Entscheidungsfähigkeit der betroffenen Person weiter aufklären (vgl. EGMR, Arskaya v. Ukraine, Urteil vom 5. Dezember 2013, Nr. 45076/05, §§ 62, 69, 70, 88).

• EGMR, 19.12.2017 - 56080/13

  LOPES DE SOUSA FERNANDES v. PORTUGAL

  The applicant submitted that, according to the more recent understanding of Article 2 of the Convention (she referred to Dodov v. Bulgaria, no. 59548/00, 17 January 2008; Mehmet Sentürk and Bekir Sentürk v. Turkey, no. 13423/09, ECHR 2013; Arskaya v. Ukraine, no. 45076/05, 5 December 2013; Asiye Genç v. Turkey, no. 24109/07, 27 January 2015; and Elena Cojocaru v. Romania, no. 74114/12, 22 March 2016), for the Court to find that there had been a violation of Article 2 under its substantive limb, it had to be established that in concrete terms the promptness and diligence which could reasonably have been expected in the circumstances of the case had been lacking and, further, that this failing had contributed to putting the victim's life at risk.
• EGMR, 13.01.2015 - 61243/08

  ELBERTE v. LATVIA

  The Court is of the view that the applicant was not required to submit to the civil courts a separate, additional request for compensation, which could also have given rise to a finding that the removal of her husband's organs had been carried out contrary to the domestic procedure and that her rights as the closest relative had been breached (see also Sergiyenko v. Ukraine, no. 47690/07, §§ 40-43, 19 April 2012; Arskaya v. Ukraine, no. 45076/05, §§ 75-81, 5 December 2013; and Valeriy Fuklev v. Ukraine, no. 6318/03, §§ 77-83, 16 January 2014, where the applicants were not required to lodge separate civil claims for the alleged medical malpractice).

 
• EGMR, 24.06.2014 - 4605/05

  PETROVA v. LATVIA

  The Court considers that the applicant was not required to submit to the civil courts a separate, additional request for compensation, which could also have given rise to a finding that the removal of her son's organs had been carried out contrary to the domestic procedure and that her rights as the closest relative had been breached (see also Sergiyenko v. Ukraine, no. 47690/07, §§ 40-43, 19 April 2012; Arskaya v. Ukraine, no. 45076/05, §§ 75-81, 5 December 2013; and Valeriy Fuklev v. Ukraine, no. 6318/03, §§ 77-83, 16 January 2014, where the applicants were not required to lodge separate civil claims for the alleged medical malpractice).
• EGMR, 15.12.2015 - 56080/13

  LOPES DE SOUSA FERNANDES c. PORTUGAL

  47039/11 and 358/12, § 122, ECHR 2012 (extracts); and Arskaya v. Ukraine, no. 45076/05, § 89, 5 December 2013).
• EGMR, 22.03.2016 - 74114/12

  ELENA COJOCARU v. ROMANIA

  They also imply the obligation to put in place an effective independent judicial system by which the cause of death of patients in the care of the medical profession, whether in the public or the private sector, can be determined and those responsible made accountable (see, among authorities, Arskaya v. Ukraine, no. 45076/05, § 63, 5 December 2013; and Mehmet Sentürk et Bekir Sentürk v. Turkey, no. 13423/09, § 81, ECHR 2013).