Weitere Entscheidung unten: EGMR, 05.07.2016

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 14097/12, 26973/12, 29176/12, 29759/12, 30412/12, 34750/12, 34753/12, 34754/12, 34757/12, 44753/12, 45132/12, 45135/12, 45140/12, 45141/12, 45848/12, 48473/12, 50130/12, 56357/12, 56362/12, 56368/12, 58632/12, 72058/12, 73195/12, 73712/12, 79146/12, 131/1   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2015,3704
EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 14097/12, 26973/12, 29176/12, 29759/12, 30412/12, 34750/12, 34753/12, 34754/12, 34757/12, 44753/12, 45132/12, 45135/12, 45140/12, 45141/12, 45848/12, 48473/12, 50130/12, 56357/12, 56362/12, 56368/12, 58632/12, 72058/12, 73195/12, 73712/12, 79146/12, 131/1 (https://dejure.org/2015,3704)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 10.03.2015 - 14097/12, 26973/12, 29176/12, 29759/12, 30412/12, 34750/12, 34753/12, 34754/12, 34757/12, 44753/12, 45132/12, 45135/12, 45140/12, 45141/12, 45848/12, 48473/12, 50130/12, 56357/12, 56362/12, 56368/12, 58632/12, 72058/12, 73195/12, 73712/12, 79146/12, 131/1 (https://dejure.org/2015,3704)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 10. März 2015 - 14097/12, 26973/12, 29176/12, 29759/12, 30412/12, 34750/12, 34753/12, 34754/12, 34757/12, 44753/12, 45132/12, 45135/12, 45140/12, 45141/12, 45848/12, 48473/12, 50130/12, 56357/12, 56362/12, 56368/12, 58632/12, 72058/12, 73195/12, 73712/12, 79146/12, 131/1 (https://dejure.org/2015,3704)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,3704) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    VARGA AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Art. 3, Art. 13, Art. 13+3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 46 MRK
    Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect) Violation of Article 13+3 - Right to an effective remedy ...

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    VARGA AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

    [DEU] Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 13+3 - Right to an effective remedy ...

  • juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

  • derstandard.at (Pressemeldung, 10.03.2015)

    Ungarn wegen überfüllter Gefängnisse verurteilt

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (48)Neu Zitiert selbst (51)

  • EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 39221/98

    SCOZZARI ET GIUNTA c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 14097/12
    Such measures must also be taken in respect of other persons in the applicant's position, notably by solving the problems that have led to the Court's findings (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII; and S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos.

    As the Court's judgments are essentially declaratory, the respondent State remains free, subject to the supervision of the Committee of Ministers, to choose the means by which it will discharge its legal obligation under Article 46 of the Convention, provided that such means are compatible with the conclusions set out in the Court's judgment (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII; and Aleksanyan v. Russia, no. 46468/06, § 238, 22 December 2008).

  • EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7654/76

    VAN OOSTERWIJCK c. BELGIQUE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 14097/12
    In this way, it is an important aspect of the principle that the machinery of protection established by the Convention is subsidiary to the national systems safeguarding human rights (see Van Oosterwijck v. Belgium, 6 November 1980, § 33-34, Series A no. 40; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 152, ECHR 2000-X; Vuckovic and Others v. Serbia [GC], no. 17153/11, § 75, 25 March 2014).

    It has further recognised that the rule of exhaustion is neither absolute nor capable of being applied automatically; in reviewing whether it has been observed it is essential to have regard to the particular circumstances of each individual case (see Van Oosterwijck v. Belgium, 6 November 1980, § 35, Series A no. 40).

  • EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98
    Auszug aus EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 14097/12
    Moreover, the level of persuasion necessary for reaching a particular conclusion and, in this connection, the distribution of the burden of proof are intrinsically linked to the specificity of the facts, the nature of the allegation made and the Convention right at stake (see, among others, Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 147, ECHR 2005-VII; Ilascu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 48787/99, § 26, ECHR 2004-VII).
  • EuGH, 05.04.2016 - C-404/15

    Die Vollstreckung eines Europäischen Haftbefehls muss aufgeschoben werden, wenn

    43      Der EGMR habe Ungarn nämlich wegen der Überfüllung seiner Gefängnisse verurteilt (EGMR, Varga u. a./Ungarn, Nrn. 14097/12, 45135/12, 73712/12, 34001/13, 44055/13 und 64586/13, vom 10. März 2015).
  • EuGH, 25.07.2018 - C-220/18

    Eine etwaige Prüfung der Haftbedingungen im Ausstellungsmitgliedstaat vor der

    Konkret möchte es wissen, ob aufgrund dieser Rechtsschutzmöglichkeit jegliche echte Gefahr unmenschlicher oder erniedrigender Behandlung ausgeschlossen werden kann, wenn - wie u. a. aus dem Urteil des EGMR vom 10. März 2015, Varga u. a./Ungarn (CE:ECHR:2015:0310JUD001409712, §§ 79 bis 92), hervorgeht - Beweise für das Vorliegen systemischer oder allgemeiner Mängel bei den Haftbedingungen in Ungarn vorliegen.

    Nach Auffassung des vorlegenden Gerichts geht nämlich aus dem Urteil des EGMR vom 10. März 2015, Varga u. a./Ungarn (CE:ECHR:2015:0310JUD001409712, §§ 79 bis 92), hervor, dass aufgrund der Überfüllung der Gefängnisse in diesem Mitgliedstaat die Gefahr bestehe, dass dort inhaftierte Personen eine unmenschliche oder erniedrigende Behandlung erfahren würden.

    Der Mitgliedstaat ist der Ansicht, dass das vorlegende Gericht dem Urteil des EGMR vom 10. März 2015, Varga u. a./Ungarn (CE:ECHR:2015:0310JUD001409712), zu Unrecht eine unverhältnismäßige Bedeutung beimesse, ohne nach Verkündung dieses Urteils eingetretene Ereignisse zu berücksichtigen.

  • BVerfG, 16.08.2018 - 2 BvR 237/18

    Auslieferung nach Ungarn zum Zwecke der Strafverfolgung aufgrund eines

    So habe der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (EGMR) mit Urteil vom 10. März 2015 entschieden, dass die Situation jedenfalls in sieben ungarischen Haftanstalten nicht mit Art. 3 EMRK vereinbar sei (unter Verweis auf EGMR, Varga and Others v. Hungary, Urteil vom 10. März 2015, Nr. 14097/12 u.a.).

    Auch die hygienischen Bedingungen in ungarischen Haftanstalten habe der EGMR beanstandet und festgestellt, dass aus den engen Raumverhältnissen, dem Mangel an Intimsphäre bei der Toilettennutzung, Insektenplagen, schlechter Belüftung und restriktiv gehandhabtem Hofgang eine entwürdigende Behandlung folge (unter Verweis auf EGMR, Varga and Others v. Hungary, Urteil vom 10. März 2015, Nr. 14097/12 u.a.).

    Schon die Einhaltung der Mindesthaftraumgröße und die Gewährleistung einer ausreichenden ärztlichen Versorgung von Gefangenen sei nicht sichergestellt, wie etwa der EGMR im Urteil vom 10. März 2015 entschieden habe (vgl. EGMR, Varga and Others v. Hungary, Nr. 14097/12 u.a.).

    Grundsätzlich sei das Urteil des EGMR vom 10. März 2015 (EGMR, Varga and Others v. Hungary, Nr. 14097/12 u.a.) geeignet, systemische Mängel zu belegen.

    Das Oberlandesgericht München sei unter Berücksichtigung der Ausführungen in den Entscheidungen des EGMR vom 14. November 2017 (Domján v. Hungary, Nr. 5433/17) und des Oberlandesgerichts Köln vom 22. November 2017 (Beschluss vom 22. November 2017 - 6 AuslA 125/17 - 102 -) zu dem Schluss gekommen, dass die Haftbedingungen in Ungarn wesentliche Änderungen erfahren hätten, so dass die Ausführungen in dessen Urteil vom 10. März 2015 (EGMR, Varga and Others v. Hungary, Nr. 14097/12 u.a.) nicht mehr als Grundlage für die Annahme systemischer Mängel hätten herangezogen werden können.

    Diese Anhaltspunkte ergeben sich insbesondere aus dem Urteil des EGMR vom 10. März 2015 (EGMR, Varga and Others v. Hungary, Nr. 14097/12 u.a.) sowie aus der Vorlage des Hanseatischen Oberlandesgerichts in Bremen (Hanseat. OLG Bremen, Beschluss vom 12. September 2016 - 1 Ausl A 3/15 -, juris).

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2016,16804
EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12 (https://dejure.org/2016,16804)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 05.07.2016 - 50130/12 (https://dejure.org/2016,16804)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 05. Juli 2016 - 50130/12 (https://dejure.org/2016,16804)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2016,16804) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    BANDUR v. HUNGARY

    Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Article 5-1-c - Reasonable suspicion);Violation of Article 5 - ...

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (14)Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

  • EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 42525/07

    ANANYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    The Court reiterates, in particular, that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are "degrading" within the meaning of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many other authorities, Karalevicius v. Lithuania, no. 53254/99, §§ 39-40, 7 April 2005; Ananyev and Others v. Russia nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, § 143, 10 January 2012; and Varga and Others v. Hungary, no. 14097/12, §§ 73- 77, 10 March 2015).

    The Court has found a violation of Article 3 because the lack or short duration of outdoor exercise was a factor that further exacerbated the situation of the applicant, who was confined to his cell for all or the rest of his time (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149-151, 10 January 2012, and the case-law cited therein).

    In Ananyev and Others v. Russia (nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, § 145, 10 January 2012) the Court found that "whereas the provision of four square metres remains the desirable standard of multi-occupancy accommodation, the Court has found that where the applicants have at their disposal less than three square metres of floor surface, the overcrowding must be considered to be so severe as to justify of itself a finding of a violation of Article 3".

  • EGMR, 10.03.2015 - 14097/12

    VARGA AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    The Court has already examined the same objection based on the exhaustion of domestic remedies, raised by the Government in the case of Varga and Others v. Hungary (nos. 14097/12, 45135/12, 73712/12, 34001/13, 44055/13, and 64586/13, 10 March 2015).

    The Court reiterates, in particular, that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are "degrading" within the meaning of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many other authorities, Karalevicius v. Lithuania, no. 53254/99, §§ 39-40, 7 April 2005; Ananyev and Others v. Russia nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, § 143, 10 January 2012; and Varga and Others v. Hungary, no. 14097/12, §§ 73- 77, 10 March 2015).

  • EGMR, 22.05.2012 - 5826/03

    IDALOV c. RUSSIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    When assessing conditions of detention, account has to be taken of the cumulative effects of those conditions, as well as of the specific allegations made by the applicant (see Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 46, ECHR 2001-II, and Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, § 94, 22 May 2012).

    Justification for any period of detention, no matter how short, must be convincingly demonstrated by the authorities (see Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, § 140, 22 May 2012).

  • EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

    LABITA c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    The existence and persistence of a reasonable suspicion that the person arrested has committed an offence is a conditio sine qua non for the lawfulness of the continued detention (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 153, ECHR 2000-IV).
  • EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 24479/94

    Recht auf Akteneinsicht bei der Haftprüfung (wesentliche Verfahrensakten;

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    While national law may satisfy this requirement in various ways, whatever method is chosen should ensure that the other party will be aware that observations have been filed and will have a real opportunity to comment on them (see Lietzow v. Germany, no. 24479/94, § 44, ECHR 2001-I).
  • EGMR, 24.11.1993 - 13972/88

    IMBRIOSCIA c. SUISSE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    According to the Court's case-law, it follows from the wording of Article 6 - and particularly from the autonomous meaning to be given to the notion of "criminal charge" - that this provision has some application to pre-trial proceedings (see Imbrioscia v. Switzerland, 24 November 1993, § 36, Series A no. 275).
  • EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 40907/98

    Griechenland, Ausweisung, Abschiebung, Abschiebungshaft, Haftbedingungen,

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    When assessing conditions of detention, account has to be taken of the cumulative effects of those conditions, as well as of the specific allegations made by the applicant (see Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 46, ECHR 2001-II, and Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, § 94, 22 May 2012).
  • EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 23541/94

    Recht auf Akteneinsicht bei der Haftprüfung (wesentliche Verfahrensakten;

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    Equality of arms is not ensured if counsel is denied access to the investigation file in so far as that access is essential in order effectively to challenge the lawfulness of his client's detention (see Garcia Alva v. Germany, no. 23541/94, § 39, 13 February 2001).
  • EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95

    WLOCH v. POLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    A "reasonable suspicion" that a criminal offence has been committed presupposes the existence of facts or information that would satisfy an objective observer that the person concerned may have committed an offence (see Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, § 108, ECHR 2000-XI).
  • EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90

    YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 05.07.2016 - 50130/12
    The Court reiterates that under the second limb of Article 5 § 3, a person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify his continuing detention (see Yagci and Sargin v. Turkey, 8 June 1995, § 52, Series A no. 319-A).
  • EGMR, 06.02.2014 - 48613/06

    ZIMIN v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 64812/01

    ALVER v. ESTONIA

  • EGMR, 25.04.2024 - 57470/22

    LAKATOS AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in, among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR - 5818/15 (anhängig)

    KÓTÉ v. HUNGARY

    Was the length of the applicant's pre-trial detention and house arrest in breach of the "reasonable time" requirement of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, 5 July 2016)?.

    Was the procedure by which the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention in conformity with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, 5 July 2016)? In particular, was the principle of equality of arms between the applicant and the prosecution respected in the present case?.

  • EGMR, 14.03.2024 - 53928/22

    KURUCZ AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR, 14.04.2022 - 76862/17

    OROSZ AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR, 31.03.2022 - 41602/17

    SZABBAH AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR, 10.02.2022 - 32917/20

    BESIROVIC AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR, 13.01.2022 - 45021/20

    CORNEANU v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR, 25.05.2022 - 33687/21

    FARKAS AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR, 31.03.2022 - 21980/21

    BANDER AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR, 24.02.2022 - 1561/21

    LAKATOS AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

    Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary, no. 50130/12, §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016.
  • EGMR, 07.03.2019 - 21763/14

    SZEKERES AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

  • EGMR - 72159/13 (anhängig)

    BACHSITZ v. HUNGARY

  • EGMR, 21.07.2022 - 20981/21

    INCE AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

  • EGMR, 25.05.2022 - 17701/21

    HANKÓ AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht