Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DUDAYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading ...

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• spiegel.de (Pressemeldung, 08.12.2015)

  Russland muss Tschetschenen 260.000 Euro zahlen

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  DUDAYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (16)Zitiert selbst (21)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  In the light of the importance of the protection afforded by Article 2 of the Convention, the Court must subject deprivation of life to the most careful scrutiny, taking into consideration not only the actions of State agents but also all the surrounding circumstances (see, among other authorities, McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, §§ 146-47, Series A no. 324, and Avşar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, § 391, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 09.06.2005 - 55723/00

  FADEÏEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  The Court has to establish first whether the costs and expenses were actually incurred and, second, whether they were necessary and reasonable (see McCann and Others, cited above, § 220, and Fadeyeva v. Russia, no. 55723/00, § 147, ECHR 2005-IV).
• EGMR, 18.06.2002 - 25656/94

  ORHAN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  The essence of such a violation does not lie mainly in the fact of the "disappearance" of the family member, but rather concerns the authorities' reaction and attitude to the situation when it is brought to their attention (see Orhan v. Turkey, no. 25656/94, § 358, 18 June 2002, and Imakayeva v. Russia, no. 7615/02, § 164, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts)).

• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 69480/01

  LOULOUÏEV ET AUTRES c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  The Court has found on many occasions that unacknowledged detention is a complete negation of the guarantees contained in Article 5 of the Convention and discloses a particularly grave violation of its provisions (see Çiçek v. Turkey, no. 25704/94, § 164, 27 February 2001, and Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, § 122, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 7615/02

  IMAKAÏEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  The essence of such a violation does not lie mainly in the fact of the "disappearance" of the family member, but rather concerns the authorities' reaction and attitude to the situation when it is brought to their attention (see Orhan v. Turkey, no. 25656/94, § 358, 18 June 2002, and Imakayeva v. Russia, no. 7615/02, § 164, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 05.07.2007 - 68007/01

  ALIKHADZHIYEVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  As regards the applicant's reference to Article 5 of the Convention, the Court considers that, in the circumstances, no separate issue arises in respect of Article 13 read in conjunction with Article 5 of the Convention (see Alikhadzhiyeva v. Russia, no. 68007/01, § 96, 5 July 2007).
• EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57945/00

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  The Court reiterates that in circumstances where, as here, the criminal investigation into a violent death and disappearance was ineffective and the effectiveness of any other remedy that may have existed, including civil remedies, was consequently undermined, the State has failed in its obligation under Article 13 of the Convention (see Khashiyev and Akayeva v. Russia, nos. 57942/00 and 57945/00, § 183, 24 February 2005).
• EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 25704/94

  CICEK v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  The Court has found on many occasions that unacknowledged detention is a complete negation of the guarantees contained in Article 5 of the Convention and discloses a particularly grave violation of its provisions (see Çiçek v. Turkey, no. 25704/94, § 164, 27 February 2001, and Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, § 122, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 18.04.2013 - 54765/09

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  The Court has made findings of presumptions of deaths in the absence of any reliable news about disappeared persons for periods ranging from four years (see Askhabova v. Russia, no. 54765/09, § 137, 18 April 2013) to more than ten years.
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 67437/09

  However, special considerations may apply in exceptional cases where an applicant avails himself of, or relies on, an apparently existing remedy and only subsequently becomes aware of circumstances which render the remedy ineffective; in such a case it is appropriate to take as the start of the six-month period the date when he or she first became aware or ought to have become aware of those circumstances rendering the remedy ineffective (see Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 46477/99, 7 June 2001).
• EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 2944/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.01.2002 - 62566/00

  HAZAR, TEKTAS, BEKIROGLU, PEKOL, BOZKUS, TEKTAS, ATMAN, ISIK, AKSUCU, DOSTER, …
• EGMR, 29.01.2002 - 38587/97

  BAYRAM and YILDIRIM v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 28.05.2002 - 73065/01

  BULUT and YAVUZ v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 31.07.2012 - 23016/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 03.05.2012 - 49379/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 24.10.2013 - 7821/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.10.2013 - 34541/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.12.2010 - 36542/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 26.03.2015 - 11237/10

  Russland muss Tschetschenen Schmerzensgeld zahlen
• EGMR, 27.03.2012 - 56765/08

  [ENG]

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 05.02.2019 - 4635/08

  [ENG]

  The documents submitted show that the applicants in each case took an active part in the proceedings and showed genuine efforts to cooperate with the authorities, and to acquaint themselves with and influence the progress of the investigations (compare Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, § 73, 8 December 2015).

  Applying the above-mentioned principles, it has concluded that it would be sufficient for the applicants to make a prima facie case for the killings having been committed by State agents, and that it would then be for the Government to discharge their burden of proof, either by disclosing documents in their exclusive possession or by providing a satisfactory and convincing explanation of how the events in question occurred (see, for example, Gandaloyeva v. Russia, no. 14800/04, §§ 95-96, 4 December 2008; Dangayeva and Taramova v. Russia, no. 1896/04, § 83, 8 January 2009; Khachukayev v. Russia, no. 28148/03, §§ 117-19, 23 April 2009; and Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, §§ 81-82, 8 December 2015).

• EGMR, 22.11.2016 - 3340/08

  ORTSUYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  42575/07, 53679/07, 311/08, 424/08, 3375/08, 4560/08, 35569/08, 62220/10, 3222/11, 22257/11, 24744/11 and 36897/11, §§ 369-74, 9 October 2014, and Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, § 71, 8 December 2015.
• EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 53075/08

  ISAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  A summary of the principles concerning compliance with the six-month rule in cases involving violations of Article 2 of the Convention allegedly perpetrated by military service personnel may be found in Sultygov and Others v. Russia (nos. 42575/07 and 11 others, §§ 369-74, 9 October 2014) and Dudayeva v. Russia (no. 67437/09, § 71, 8 December 2015).

• EGMR, 21.01.2020 - 36963/09

  SAIDOVA v. RUSSIA and 7 other applications

  The Court notes that at the outset that in Adisova and Others (no. 13793/13) the compensation received by the applicants at the domestic level was significantly lower than the Court's awards in similar cases (compare Umarova and Others v. Russia, no. 25654/08, § 125, 31 July 2012, and Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, § 116, 8 December 2015).
• EGMR, 24.09.2019 - 12642/13

  BAYSULTANOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  42575/07 and 11 others, §§ 369-74, 9 October 2014, and Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, § 71, 8 December 2015.
• EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 6636/09

  KHAMKHOYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  A summary of the principles concerning compliance with the six-month rule in cases involving violations of Article 2 of the Convention allegedly perpetrated by military servicemen may be found in Sultygov and Others (cited above, § 369-74) and Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, § 71, 8 December 2015.
• EGMR, 19.12.2017 - 29729/09

  [ENG]

  As regards specifically Article 5 of the Convention, the Court notes that in certain cases - for instance cases against Russia in relation to alleged abductions or suspicious disappearances of the applicants' relatives in North Caucasus (in circumstances engaging responsibility of the State under the Convention) - the Court has found violations of Article 5 of the Convention, in particular under its paragraph 1, and has made awards under Article 41 of the Convention to the victims' next of kin with reference to the finding of a violation in respect of the victim under Article 2 of the Convention as well as, apparently, its Article 5 (see, for instance, Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, §§ 104 and 116, 8 December 2015; Islamova v. Russia, no. 5713/11, §§ 72 and 83, 30 April 2015; and Khava Aziyeva and Others v. Russia, no. 30237/10, §§ 106 and 121, 23 April 2015; see also Taş v. Turkey, no. 24396/94, § 102, 14 November 2000).
• EGMR, 11.06.2020 - 32349/16

  VUJNOVIC v. CROATIA

  The relevant general principles concerning the six-month time-limit are set out in the case of Mocanu and Others v. Romania ([GC], nos. 10865/09 and 2 others, §§ 258-269, ECHR 2014 (extracts); see also Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, §§ 65-68, 8 December 2015, and Milić v. Croatia, no. 38766/15, §§ 25-30, 25 January 2018).
• EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 31143/11

  DZHAMAKHADZHIYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  42575/07 and 11 others, §§ 369-74, 9 October 2014, and Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, § 71, 8 December 2015.
• EGMR, 04.06.2019 - 2660/12

  ESAMBAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  42575/07 and 11 others, §§ 369-74, 9 October 2014, and Dudayeva v. Russia, no. 67437/09, § 71, 8 December 2015.
• EGMR, 24.09.2019 - 34909/12

  ISRAILOVY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 14.01.2020 - 21129/09

  BANZHAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 11499/14 (anhängig)

  DZHALILOV v. RUSSIA and 5 other applications
• EGMR, 12.03.2019 - 19650/11

  DAGALAYEVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 04.02.2020 - 56120/13

  BAYSULTANOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 04.06.2019 - 13916/12

  MUKHTAROVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA