Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
B. v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
Art. 3, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies) Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Positive obligations) Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and ...
Kurzfassungen/Presse
- institut-fuer-menschenrechte.de (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
B. gegen Moldawien
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
B. v. the Republic of Moldova
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (7)
- EGMR, 25.03.1993 - 13134/87
Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09
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 Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 91, ECHR 2000-XI).To that end States are to maintain and apply in practice an adequate legal framework affording protection against acts of violence by private individuals (see X and Y v. the Netherlands, 26 March 1985, § 22 and 23, Series A no. 91; 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, cited above, §§ 150 and 152, ECHR 2003-XII; Bevacqua, cited above, § 65, and Sandra Jankovic v. Croatia, no. 38478/05, § 45, 5 March 2009).
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 v. the Netherlands, 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; A v. Croatia, no. 55164/08, § 60, 14 October 2010; and Hajduová v. Slovakia, no. 2660/03, § 46, 30 November 2010).
- EGMR, 04.12.2003 - 39272/98
M.C. c. BULGARIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09
Furthermore, Article 3 requires that the authorities conduct an effective official investigation into the alleged ill-treatment even if such treatment has been inflicted by private individuals (see M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, § 151, ECHR 2003-XII, and Denis Vasilyev v. Russia, no. 32704/04, §§ 98-99, 17 December 2009).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 v. the Netherlands, 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; A v. Croatia, no. 55164/08, § 60, 14 October 2010; and Hajduová v. Slovakia, no. 2660/03, § 46, 30 November 2010).
- EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
NILSEN AND JOHNSEN v. NORWAY
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09
The Court reiterates that in order for costs and expenses to be included in an award under Article 41, it must be established that they were actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see, for example, Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 62, ECHR 1999-VIII).
- EGMR, 04.03.2008 - 42722/02
STOICA v. ROMANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09
Consideration has been given to the opening of investigations, delays in taking statements and to the length of time taken for the initial investigation (see Denis Vasilyev, cited above, § 100 with further references; and Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, § 67, 4 March 2008). - EGMR, 17.12.2009 - 32704/04
DENIS VASILYEV v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09
Furthermore, Article 3 requires that the authorities conduct an effective official investigation into the alleged ill-treatment even if such treatment has been inflicted by private individuals (see M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, § 151, ECHR 2003-XII, and Denis Vasilyev v. Russia, no. 32704/04, §§ 98-99, 17 December 2009). - EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02
Opuz ./. Türkei
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09
A summary of the relevant international materials has been made in the case of Opuz v. Turkey (no. 33401/02, §§ 72-86, ECHR 2009) and Eremia v. the Republic of Moldova (no. 3564/11, §§ 29-37, 28 May 2013, not yet final). - EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09
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 Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 91, ECHR 2000-XI).
- EGMR, 13.10.2016 - 1870/05
IRINA SMIRNOVA v. UKRAINE
It appears that in the present case applicable law did not afford to the applicant any meaningful forum in which she could object against cohabitation with A.N., V.S. and their acquaintances on the ground that such cohabitation created disproportionate consequences for her rights guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, McCann v. the United Kingdom, no. 19009/04, §§ 49-50 and 55, ECHR 2008; Cosic v. Croatia, no. 28261/06, § 21-23, 15 January 2009; and B. v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 61382/09, § 74, 16 July 2013) and obtain appropriate and expeditious protection against unwanted intrusions into her personal space and home, including, if necessary, by way of an injunction order (see, mutatis mutandis, Söderman, § 85).
Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 07.12.2017 - 3564/11, 61382/09, 74839/10 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
EREMIA CONTRE LA RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA ET 2 AUTRES AFFAIRES
Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises permettant d'éviter de nouvelles violations. Versement des sommes prévues dans l'arrêt (französisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
EREMIA AGAINST THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND 2 OTHER CASES
Information given by the government concerning measures taken to prevent new violations. Payment of the sums provided for in the judgment (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 28.05.2013 - 3564/11
- EGMR, 07.12.2017 - 3564/11, 61382/09, 74839/10