Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VOSYLIUS AND VOSYLIENE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 2, Art. 6, Art. 35 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Zitiert selbst (7)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 24.10.2002 - 37703/97

  Verantwortung des Staates für Mord durch beurlaubte Gefangene; Verpflichtung des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 61974/11

  - Article 2 imposes a duty on the State to secure the right to life by putting in place effective criminal-law provisions to deter the commission of offences against the person, backed up by law-enforcement machinery for the prevention, suppression and punishment of breaches of such provisions (see Osman v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, p. 3159, § 115; Mastromatteo v. Italy [GC], no. 37703/97, §§ 67 and 89, ECHR 2002-VIII; and Menson v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 47916/99, ECHR 2003-V; Kontrová v. Slovakia, no. 7510/04, § 49, 31 May 2007).

  Moreover, it is not for this Court to call into question such mechanisms and their existence does not weaken the effective judicial protection of the right to life (see, for instance, Maiorano and Others v. Italy, no. 28634/06, § 112, 15 December 2009; Mastromatteo v. Italy [GC], no. 37703/97, §§ 72-73, ECHR 2002-VIII).

• EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 33401/02

  Opuz ./. Türkei

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 61974/11

  - There is an implicit requirement that the proceedings be conducted promptly and with reasonable expedition (Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, § 150, ECHR 2009).
• EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 61974/11

  - Thus, the effective judicial system required by Article 2 may, and under certain circumstances must, include recourse to the criminal law (Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 51, ECHR 2002-I).

• EGMR, 12.02.2004 - 47287/99

  PEREZ c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 61974/11

  - Article 2 does not entail the right for an applicant to have third parties prosecuted or sentenced for a criminal offence (see, mutatis mutandis, Perez v. France [GC], no. 47287/99, § 70, ECHR 2004-I) or an absolute obligation for all prosecutions to result in conviction, or indeed in a particular sentence (see, mutatis mutandis, Tanlı v. Turkey, no. 26129/95, § 111, ECHR 2001-III).
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 61974/11

  - Compliance with the State's positive obligations under Article 2 requires the domestic legal system to demonstrate its capacity to enforce criminal law against those who have unlawfully taken the life of another (see Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 160, ECHR 2005-VII).
• EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 47916/99

  MENSON contre le ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 61974/11

  - Article 2 imposes a duty on the State to secure the right to life by putting in place effective criminal-law provisions to deter the commission of offences against the person, backed up by law-enforcement machinery for the prevention, suppression and punishment of breaches of such provisions (see Osman v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, p. 3159, § 115; Mastromatteo v. Italy [GC], no. 37703/97, §§ 67 and 89, ECHR 2002-VIII; and Menson v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 47916/99, ECHR 2003-V; Kontrová v. Slovakia, no. 7510/04, § 49, 31 May 2007).
• EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 7510/04

  KONTROVA c. SLOVAQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 61974/11

  - Article 2 imposes a duty on the State to secure the right to life by putting in place effective criminal-law provisions to deter the commission of offences against the person, backed up by law-enforcement machinery for the prevention, suppression and punishment of breaches of such provisions (see Osman v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, p. 3159, § 115; Mastromatteo v. Italy [GC], no. 37703/97, §§ 67 and 89, ECHR 2002-VIII; and Menson v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 47916/99, ECHR 2003-V; Kontrová v. Slovakia, no. 7510/04, § 49, 31 May 2007).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 18.09.2014 - 74448/12

  BLJAKAJ AND OTHERS v. CROATIA

  Against the above background, the Court finds that in the present case it is not necessary to go into the issue of the requirement of personal protection of one or more individuals identifiable in advance as the potential target of a lethal act (see paragraph 107 above), or to deal with the question of the scope of the states" positive obligations in cases concerning random violence out of the practical control or possible reasonable knowledge of the domestic authorities (see Acet v. Turkey (dec.), no. 41590/06, 29 June 2010, and Vosylius and Vosyliene v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 61974/11, 3 September 2013).
• EGMR, 30.03.2021 - 37801/16

  RIBCHEVA v. BULGARIA and 2 other applications

  They unfolded within a reasonable time, the applicants were able to participate in them effectively, and the courts which dealt with the case examined in detail the circumstances in which Mr P.P. had killed Mr Sharkov, meted out the harshest possible sentence, and allowed the applicants' claims for damages against Mr P.P. in full (see paragraphs 31 to 37 above, and compare with Vosylius and Vosyliene v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 61974/11, §§ 28-31, 3 September 2013).