Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Doctrine(Abodienst, kostenloses Probeabo)
  Mit KI-Zusammenfassung und KI-Dialogfeld, um Fragen zur Entscheidung stellen.
  Doctrine ist die neue umfassende Rechts-KI-Plattform in Kooperation mit dejure.org. Mehr Informationen

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M.A. v. LATVIA

  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Article 5-1-e - Persons of unsound mind) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  M.A. v. LATVIA

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Zitiert selbst (10)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 02.11.2021 - 38958/16

  W.A. c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  Rn. 80 The word "conviction" for the purposes of Article 5 § 1 (a) has to be understood as signifying both a finding of guilt after it has been established in accordance with the law that there has been an offence, and the imposition of a penalty or other measure involving the deprivation of liberty (see W.A. v. Switzerland, no. 38958/16, § 32, 2 November 2021).
• EGMR, 24.11.2011 - 4646/08

  O.H. ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  The relevant time at which a person must be reliably established to be of unsound mind, for the requirements of Article 5 § 1 (e), is the date of the adoption of the measure depriving that person of his or her liberty as a result of that condition (see O.H. v. Germany, no. 4646/08, § 78, 24 November 2011).
• EGMR, 18.01.2007 - 73819/01

  ESTRIKH v. LATVIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  This means, amongst other things, that the Court must take realistic account, in particular, of the personal circumstances of the applicant (see Estrikh v. Latvia, no. 73819/01, §§ 92 and 94, 18 January 2007, with further references).

• EGMR, 11.01.2024 - 76680/17

  D v. LATVIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  Rn. 68 The Court notes that in cases concerning conditions of detention in Latvian prisons, including the adequacy of medical care, it has consistently held the view that an applicant must exhaust domestic remedies by pursuing complaints before the administrative courts (see D v. Latvia, no. 76680/17, § 33, 11 January 2024; Kočegarovs and Others v. Latvia (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 11.05.2021 - 73731/17

  EPURE v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  Rn. 66 The assessment of the situation of detainees with mental disorders has to take into consideration their vulnerability and, in some cases, their inability to complain coherently or at all about how they are being affected by any particular treatment (see Epure v. Romania, no. 73731/17, § 54, 11 May 2021, with further references).
• EGMR, 11.02.2014 - 19437/05

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  In this connection, they referred to Antonovs v. Latvia ((dec.), no. 19437/05, § 111, 11 February 2014) and Jegorovs v. Latvia ((dec.), no. 53281/08, §§ 155-56, 1 July 2014) and argued that the administrative courts had also had the competence to review the Health Inspectorate's decisions and, more generally, complaints pertaining to the quality of medical care in prison.
• EGMR, 01.07.2014 - 53281/08

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  In this connection, they referred to Antonovs v. Latvia ((dec.), no. 19437/05, § 111, 11 February 2014) and Jegorovs v. Latvia ((dec.), no. 53281/08, §§ 155-56, 1 July 2014) and argued that the administrative courts had also had the competence to review the Health Inspectorate's decisions and, more generally, complaints pertaining to the quality of medical care in prison.
• EGMR, 18.11.2014 - 14516/10

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  14516/10 and 2 others, § 110, 18 November 2014; Jegorovs, cited above, §§ 110-11; and Antonovs, cited above, § 111).
• EGMR, 09.12.2014 - 27979/08

  ABOLINS v. LATVIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  They referred in this respect to Āboliņš v. Latvia ((dec.), no. 27979/08, § 25, 9 December 2014) and provided examples of the domestic practice of the administrative courts, including with regard to the examination of requests for interim measures (concerning, specifically, an imprisoned person's right to meet with relatives (granted), an applicant's examination and treatment for hepatitis C free of charge (refused) and an applicant's request to be provided with appropriate nutrition in prison (refused)).
• EGMR, 12.02.2008 - 34151/04

  PANKIEWICZ v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.11.2025 - 55234/21

  However, the applicability of one ground does not necessarily preclude that of another; a detention may, depending on the circumstances, be justified under more than one sub-paragraph (see Pankiewicz v. Poland, no. 34151/04, § 38, 12 February 2008, and Brand v. the Netherlands, no. 49902/99, § 58, 11 May 2004).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR - 8755/26 (anhängig)

  BUALLI v. ALBANIA

  Did the applicant's detention since June 2001 fall within one of the grounds authorising deprivation of liberty listed in sub-paragraphs (a) to (f) of Article 5 § 1 and was it lawful and justified for the purposes of that provision, and therefore in conformity with Article 5 § 1 (see Rooman v. Belgium [GC], no. 18052/11, §§ 205-14, 31 January 2019; Pankiewicz v. Poland, no. 34151/04, §§ 44-45, 12 February 2008; Strazimiri v. Albania, no. 34602/16, §§ 116-24, 21 January 2020; Sy v. Italy, no. 11791/20, §§ 93-149, 24 January 2022; and M.A. v. Latvia, no. 55234/21, §§ 78-93, 6 November 2025)?.