Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DURDEVIC c. CROATIE [Extraits]

  Art. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Non-violation de l'art. 3 (volet matériel) Violation de l'art. 3 (volet procédural) Partiellement irrecevable Préjudice moral - réparation (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DURDEVIC v. CROATIA

  Art. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  No violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09
• EGMR, 08.12.2020 - 52442/09

Wird zitiert von ... (17)Neu Zitiert selbst (20)

• EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5095/71

  KJELDSEN, BUSK MADSEN AND PEDERSEN v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  It recalls that the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols must be read as a whole (see the Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v. Denmark judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 23, pp. 26 and 27, paras. 52 and 54, and the Soering v. the United Kingdom judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 161, p. 40, para. 103).

  The fundamental right of everyone to education is a right guaranteed equally to pupils in State and independent schools, no distinction being made between the two (see, mutatis mutandis, the above-mentioned Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen judgment, Series A no. 23, p. 24, para. 50).

• EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  The Court reiterates that ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this minimum is relative: it depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the nature and context of the treatment, its duration, its physical and mental effects and, in some instances, the sex, age and state of health of the victim (see Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 30, Series A no. 247-C, and A. v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 20).

  To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII; Bevacqua and S. v. Bulgaria, no. 71127/01, § 65, 12 June 2008; and Sandra Jankovic, cited above, § 45).

• EGMR, 10.10.2002 - 38719/97

  D.P. & J.C. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII; Bevacqua and S. v. Bulgaria, no. 71127/01, § 65, 12 June 2008; and Sandra Jankovic, cited above, § 45).

 
• EGMR, 04.12.2003 - 39272/98

  M.C. c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII; Bevacqua and S. v. Bulgaria, no. 71127/01, § 65, 12 June 2008; and Sandra Jankovic, cited above, § 45).
• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

  Jens Söring

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  It recalls that the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols must be read as a whole (see the Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v. Denmark judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 23, pp. 26 and 27, paras. 52 and 54, and the Soering v. the United Kingdom judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 161, p. 40, para. 103).
• EGMR, 23.11.1983 - 8919/80

  VAN DER MUSSELE c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  Thirdly, the Court agrees with the applicant that the State cannot absolve itself from responsibility by delegating its obligations to private bodies or individuals (see, mutatis mutandis, the Van der Mussele v. Belgium judgment of 23 November 1983, Series A no. 70, pp. 14-15, paras. 28-30).
• EGMR, 25.02.1982 - 7511/76

  CAMPBELL ET COSANS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  Functions relating to the internal administration of a school, such as discipline, cannot be said to be merely ancillary to the educational process (see, mutatis mutandis, the Campbell and Cosans v. the United Kingdom judgment of 25 February 1982, Series A no. 48, p. 14, para. 33).
• EGMR, 06.12.2012 - 71127/01

  BEVACQUA AND S. AGAINST BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  To that end they are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y, cited above, §§ 22 and 23; Costello-Roberts v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1993, § 36, Series A no. 247-C; D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38719/97, § 118, 10 October 2002; M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII; Bevacqua and S. v. Bulgaria, no. 71127/01, § 65, 12 June 2008; and Sandra Jankovic, cited above, § 45).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21594/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines türkischen Staatsangehörigen durch türkische …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  Since the officers conducting the investigation were subordinated to the same chain of command as those officers subject to investigation, serious doubts arise as to their ability to carry out an independent investigation (see, mutatis mutandis, OÄ?ur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, § 91, ECHR 1999-III, and Matko, cited above, § 89).
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 28883/95

  McKERR c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 52442/09

  In the instant case, however, the State Attorney's conduct also lacked the necessary transparency and appearance of independence (see, mutatis mutandis, McKerr v. the United Kingdom, no. 28883/95, § 131, ECHR 2001-III, and Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, § 123, ECHR 2001-III (extracts)).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …
• EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00

  MIFSUD contre la FRANCE
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 20.07.2004 - 47940/99

  BALOGH v. HUNGARY
• EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 50222/99

  KRASTANOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 17.10.2006 - 52067/99

  OKKALI c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 22.02.2007 - 2293/03

  WIESER v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 16.12.2010 - 11528/07

  TAYMUSKHANOVY v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98

• EGMR, 09.11.2017 - 47274/15

  Konflikt zwischen Polizei und Fans ungenügend untersucht

  Eine vertretbare Behauptung setzt lediglich einen vernünftigen Verdacht voraus, dass Beschwerdeführer von der Polizei oder einer sonstigen innerstaatlichen Behörde misshandelt wurden (vgl. Assenov u. a../. Bulgarien, 28. Oktober 1998, Rdnrn. 101 und 102, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII, und urÄ?evic./. Kroatien, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 52442/09, Rdnr. 86, ECHR 2011 (Auszüge)).
• EGMR, 25.07.2013 - 32133/11

  KUMMER v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  This means not only a lack of hierarchical or institutional connection but also a practical independence (see Ä�urÄ?evic v. Croatia, no. 52442/09, § 85, ECHR 2011 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 19.12.2017 - 19796/14

  KRSMANOVIC v. SERBIA

  Secondly, for an investigation to be considered effective it may generally be regarded as necessary for the persons responsible for and carrying out the investigation to be independent from those implicated in the events, which means not only a lack of hierarchical or institutional connection but also a practical independence (see Ramsahai and Others [GC], cited above, § 325; see also urÄ?evic v. Croatia, no. 52442/09, § 85, ECHR 2011 (extracts), and the authorities citied therein).

 
• EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 64418/10

  MIHHAILOV v. ESTONIA

  This means not only a lack of hierarchical or institutional connection but also independence in practice (see, among others, urÄ?evic v. Croatia, no. 52442/09, § 85, ECHR 2011 (extracts); Mocanu and Others, cited above, § 320; and, mutatis mutandis, Mustafa Tunç and Fecire Tunç v. Turkey [GC], no. 24014/05, §§ 219-234, 14 April 2015).
• EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 29525/10

  REMETIN v. CROATIA

  The Court considers that the applicant, owing to his age, may be considered to fall within the group of "vulnerable individuals" entitled to State protection (see A. v. the United Kingdom, 23 September 1998, § 22, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VI; and Ä�urÄ?evic v. Croatia, no. 52442/09, § 109, ECHR 2011 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 10.12.2019 - 71667/17

  KUSIC v. CROATIA

  On 13 November 2014, in decision U-III-6559/2010 (Official Gazette no. 142/14), the Constitutional Court, referring to the standards for an effective investigation outlined in the Court's judgments in Dolenec v. Croatia (no. 25282/06, §§ 120-130 and 143-145, 26 November 2009), Gladovic v. Croatia (no. 28847/08, §§ 39-40 and 46-49, 10 May 2011), MaÄ?er v. Croatia (no. 56185/07, §§ 105-107 and 111-112, 21 June 2011), urÄ?evic v. Croatia (no. 52442/09, §§ 72-74, 77 and 83-85, ECHR 2011) (extracts) and V.D. v. Croatia (no. 15526/10, §§ 60-65, 8 November 2011), for the first time accepted a constitutional complaint concerning the lack of an effective investigation into the complainant's alleged ill-treatment.
• EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 7446/12

  REMETIN v. CROATIA (No. 2)

  The Court notes that in a number of cases against Croatia concerning the State's procedural obligation to investigate acts of violence, it has already rejected the same objections raised by the Government in the case at hand (see Sandra Jankovic, cited above, §§ 35-36; Beganovic, cited above § 56; Ä�urÄ?evic v. Croatia, no. 52442/09, § 67, ECHR 2011 (extracts); D.J. v. Croatia, no. 42418/10, §§ 63-65, 24 July 2012; and Remetin v. Croatia, no. 29525/10, §§ 73-77, 11 December 2012).
• EGMR, 29.04.2014 - 32277/07

  DEKIC AND OTHERS v. SERBIA

  There are no indications that she was prepared in any way to scrutinise the police account of the events (compare Ä�urÄ?evic v. Croatia, no. 52442/09, §§ 89-90, ECHR 2011; contrast Berlinski v. Poland, nos. 27715/95 and 30209/96, §§ 69-70, 20 June 2002, and Stojnsek v. Slovenia, no. 1926/03, § 101, 23 June 2009).
• EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 8550/03

  SAPOZKOVS v. LATVIA

  The requirement of independence, while spelled out by the Court in cases concerning effectiveness of an investigation into alleged unlawful killing by State agents in connection with complaints under Article 2, is also applicable to investigations of allegations of ill-treatment by State agents under Article 3 (see Mehmet Emin Yüksel v. Turkey, no. 40154/98, § 37, 20 July 2004; Barbu Anghelescu v. Romania, no. 46430/99, § 66, 5 October 2004; Dolenec v. Croatia, no. 25282/06, § 152, 26 November 2009; Ä�urÄ?evic v. Croatia, no. 52442/09, § 85, ECHR 2011 (extracts); Timofejevi, cited above, § 95; Grimailovs, cited above, § 105; and Holodenko, cited above, § 78).
• EGMR, 09.10.2012 - 18996/06

  MIKIASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  The fact that the prosecutor made no attempts to scrutinize the investigator's account of the incident further undermines the effectiveness of the investigation (see, Matko v. Slovenia, no. 43393/98, § 90, 2 November 2006; Ä�urÄ?evic v. Croatia, no. 52442/09, §§ 89-90, ECHR 2011 (extracts), and Butolen, cited above, § 76).
• EGMR, 13.11.2018 - 23183/15

  A.T. v. ESTONIA
• EGMR, 21.02.2019 - 7088/11

  GABLISHVILI AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 09.05.2017 - 68516/14

  FERGEC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 12.07.2016 - 45104/05

  KOTELNIKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 01.12.2016 - 5821/10

  GERASIMENKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 45393/04

  TIMOFEJEVI v. LATVIA
• EGMR, 20.12.2018 - 44973/09

  MAISURADZE v. GEORGIA