Weiteres Verfahren unten: EGMR

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13, 60882/12, 53390/13   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2015,24902
EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13, 60882/12, 53390/13 (https://dejure.org/2015,24902)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 17.09.2015 - 13008/13, 60882/12, 53390/13 (https://dejure.org/2015,24902)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 17. September 2015 - 13008/13, 60882/12, 53390/13 (https://dejure.org/2015,24902)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,24902) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    KOVYAZIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

    Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Speediness of review) (englisch)

 
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 ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

  • EGMR, 27.11.2012 - 41461/10

    DIRDIZOV v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13
    The Court has already, on numerous occasions, examined applications against Russia raising similar complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in respect of the Russian courts" failure to provide sufficient and relevant grounds for applicants" detention (see, among many other authorities, Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, §§ 108-11, 27 November 2012; Zherebin v. Russia, no. 51445/09, communicated on 13 November 2012; and Taranenko, cited above, §§ 52-55).
  • EGMR, 01.06.2006 - 7064/05

    MAMEDOVA v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13
    It finds that these periods cannot be considered compatible with the "speediness" requirement of Article 5 § 4, especially taking into account that their entire duration was attributable to the authorities (see, for example, Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, § 96, 1 June 2006; Khudoyorov, cited above, §§ 198 and 203; and Rehbock v. Slovenia, no. 29462/95, §§ 85-86, ECHR 2000-XII, where review proceedings which lasted twenty-three days were not "speedy").
  • EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

    KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13
    The Court has already, on numerous occasions, examined applications against Russia raising similar complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in respect of the Russian courts" failure to provide sufficient and relevant grounds for applicants" detention (see, among many other authorities, Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, §§ 108-11, 27 November 2012; Zherebin v. Russia, no. 51445/09, communicated on 13 November 2012; and Taranenko, cited above, §§ 52-55).
  • EGMR, 28.11.2000 - 29462/95

    REHBOCK c. SLOVENIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13
    It finds that these periods cannot be considered compatible with the "speediness" requirement of Article 5 § 4, especially taking into account that their entire duration was attributable to the authorities (see, for example, Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, § 96, 1 June 2006; Khudoyorov, cited above, §§ 198 and 203; and Rehbock v. Slovenia, no. 29462/95, §§ 85-86, ECHR 2000-XII, where review proceedings which lasted twenty-three days were not "speedy").
  • EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

    LETELLIER c. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13
    Nor can continuation of the detention be used to anticipate a custodial sentence (see Letellier v. France, 26 June 1991, § 51, Series A no. 207; Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, § 102, 8 February 2005; Goral v. Poland, no. 38654/97, § 68, 30 October 2003; and Ilijkov v. Bulgaria, no. 33977/96, § 81, 26 July 2001).
  • EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

    Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13
    Continued detention can be justified in a given case only if there are actual indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty laid down in Article 5 of the Convention (see Idalov, cited above, § 139, and Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 110 et seq., ECHR 2000-XI).
  • EGMR, 24.03.2016 - 51445/09

    ZHEREBIN v. RUSSIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13
    The Court has already, on numerous occasions, examined applications against Russia raising similar complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in respect of the Russian courts" failure to provide sufficient and relevant grounds for applicants" detention (see, among many other authorities, Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, §§ 108-11, 27 November 2012; Zherebin v. Russia, no. 51445/09, communicated on 13 November 2012; and Taranenko, cited above, §§ 52-55).
  • EGMR, 06.03.2001 - 40907/98

    Griechenland, Ausweisung, Abschiebung, Abschiebungshaft, Haftbedingungen,

    Auszug aus EGMR, 17.09.2015 - 13008/13
    When assessing conditions of detention, account has to be taken of the cumulative effects of these conditions, as well as of specific allegations made by the applicant (see Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 46, ECHR 2001-II, and Idalov, cited above, § 94, 22 May 2012).
  • EGMR, 05.12.2023 - 35614/19

    ILERDE AND OTHERS v. TÜRKIYE

    Furthermore, it was not disputed between the parties that in addition to a door opening onto the outdoor yard, each unit had several windows, which allowed for ventilation and light (for a similar conclusion, see Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13 and 2 others, § 108, 17 September 2015, and Aliyev v. Azerbaijan, nos.
  • EGMR, 19.11.2019 - 75734/12

    RAZVOZZHAYEV v. RUSSIA AND UKRAINE AND UDALTSOV v. RUSSIA

    13008/13, 60882/12 and 53390/13, § 71, 17 September 2015).
  • EGMR, 06.02.2018 - 2613/13

    AKIMENKOV v. RUSSIA

    The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13 and 2 others, § 71, 17 September 2015; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Khodorkovskiy, cited above, § 165).
  • EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 63686/13

    STEPAN ZIMIN v. RUSSIA

    The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 165, 31 May 2011; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13, 60882/12 and 53390/13, § 71, 17 September 2015).
  • EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 6312/13

    LUTSKEVICH v. RUSSIA

    The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13 and 2 others, § 71, 17 September 2015; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 165, 31 May 2011).
  • EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 4966/13

    BARABANOV v. RUSSIA

    The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13 and 2 others, § 71, 17 September 2015; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 165, 31 May 2011).
  • EGMR, 30.01.2018 - 62630/13

    POLIKHOVICH v. RUSSIA

    The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13 and 2 others, § 71, 17 September 2015; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 165, 31 May 2011).
  • EGMR, 28.11.2017 - 19327/13

    KAVKAZSKIY v. RUSSIA

    The Court therefore deems it more appropriate to deal with this complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Kovyazin and Others v. Russia, nos. 13008/13 and 2 others, § 71, 17 September 2015; Taranenko v. Russia, no. 19554/05, § 46, 15 May 2014; and Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 165, 31 May 2011).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR - 60882/12, 2613/13, 2653/13, 4966/13, 13008/13, 15669/13, 19327/13   

Anhängiges Verfahren
Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/9999,65928
EGMR - 60882/12, 2613/13, 2653/13, 4966/13, 13008/13, 15669/13, 19327/13 (https://dejure.org/9999,65928)
EGMR - 60882/12, Entscheidung vom 2613/13, 2653/13, 4966/13, 13008/13, 15669/13, 19327/13 (https://dejure.org/9999,65928)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/9999,65928) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Sonstiges

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