Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TAHIROVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  Art. 3, Art. 11, Art. 11 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) Violation of Article 11 - Freedom of ...

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Tahirova v. Azerbaijan

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Zitiert selbst (10)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Ableitung einer allgemeinen Verpflichtung zur Entlassung eines …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  Ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. Assessment of this minimum level depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 162, Series A no. 25; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 91, ECHR 2000-XI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 67, ECHR 2001-III).
• EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95

  PEERS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  Ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. Assessment of this minimum level depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 162, Series A no. 25; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 91, ECHR 2000-XI; and Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 67, ECHR 2001-III).
• EGMR, 29.11.2007 - 25/02

  BALÇIK AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  The Court reiterates that an interference will constitute a breach of Article 11 unless it is "prescribed by law", pursues one or more legitimate aims under paragraph 2, and is "necessary in a democratic society" for the achievement of those aims (see Djavit An v. Turkey, no. 20652/92, § 63, ECHR 2003-III; Balçık and Others v. Turkey, no. 25/02, § 44, 29 November 2007; and Sergey Kuznetsov v. Russia, no. 10877/04, § 37, 23 October 2008).

• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  The Court is sensitive to the subsidiary nature of its role and recognises that it must be cautious in taking on the role of a first-instance tribunal of fact, where this is not rendered unavoidable by the circumstances of a particular case (see, for example, McKerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 28883/95, 4 April 2000).
• EGMR, 20.02.2003 - 20652/92

  DJAVIT AN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  The Court reiterates that an interference will constitute a breach of Article 11 unless it is "prescribed by law", pursues one or more legitimate aims under paragraph 2, and is "necessary in a democratic society" for the achievement of those aims (see Djavit An v. Turkey, no. 20652/92, § 63, ECHR 2003-III; Balçık and Others v. Turkey, no. 25/02, § 44, 29 November 2007; and Sergey Kuznetsov v. Russia, no. 10877/04, § 37, 23 October 2008).
• EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 10877/04

  SERGEY KUZNETSOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  The Court reiterates that an interference will constitute a breach of Article 11 unless it is "prescribed by law", pursues one or more legitimate aims under paragraph 2, and is "necessary in a democratic society" for the achievement of those aims (see Djavit An v. Turkey, no. 20652/92, § 63, ECHR 2003-III; Balçık and Others v. Turkey, no. 25/02, § 44, 29 November 2007; and Sergey Kuznetsov v. Russia, no. 10877/04, § 37, 23 October 2008).
• EGMR, 10.07.2001 - 25657/94

  AVSAR c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  Such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact (see, among many other authorities, Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 282, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 57834/00

  KABLAN contre la TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  Any deficiency in the investigation which undermines its ability to establish the cause of injuries or the identity of those responsible will risk falling foul of this standard (see Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, § 134, ECHR 2004-IV (extracts)).
• EGMR, 02.04.2009 - 22684/05

  MURADOVA v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  Nevertheless, where allegations are made under Article 3 of the Convention, the Court must apply a particularly thorough scrutiny even if certain domestic proceedings and investigations have already taken place (see Muradova v. Azerbaijan, no. 22684/05, § 99, 2 April 2009, and Avsar, cited above, §§ 283-84).
• EGMR, 31.03.2005 - 38187/97

  ADALI v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 47137/07

  In view of the essential nature of freedom of assembly and its close relationship with democracy there must be convincing and compelling reasons to justify an interference with this right (see Ouranio Toxo v. Greece, no. 74989/01, § 36, ECHR 2005-X (extracts), and Adalı v. Turkey, no. 38187/97, § 267, 31 March 2005, with further references).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 15.01.2019 - 1128/16

  GJINI v. SERBIA

  It would thus be more appropriately examined at the merits stage (see Tahirova v. Azerbaijan, no. 47137/07, § 50, 3 October 2013, and Mikheyev v. Russia, no. 77617/01, § 88, 26 January 2006).
• EGMR, 08.06.2021 - 8372/07

  TSUROYEV v. RUSSIA

  Once the matter has come to the attention of the authorities, they must act of their own motion and cannot leave it to the applicant to take responsibility for the conduct of investigatory procedure (see Tahirova v. Azerbaijan, no. 47137/07, § 57, 3 October 2013).
• EGMR, 31.07.2014 - 26452/11

  TATISHVILI c. GRÈCE

  47137/07, § 84, 3 &Omikron;κτωβρί&omikron;υ 2013), συν κάθε π&omikron;σό π&omikron;υ µπ&omikron;ρεί να &omikron;φείλεται ως φόρ&omikron;ς.
• EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 46505/08

  [ENG]

  In this connection, the Court attaches a particular weight to the medical evidence, such as forensic report, medical record or any other medical finding, confirming the existence of injuries on the applicant's body (see, among many other authorities, Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 34445/04, § 61, 11 January 2007; Tahirova v. Azerbaijan, no. 47137/07, § 40, 3 October 2013; and Layijov v. Azerbaijan, no. 22062/07, § 44, 10 April 2014).