Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GORSHKOV v. UKRAINE

  Art. 2, Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. e, Art. 4, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3, Art. 35 Abs. 4 MRK
  Admissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 67531/01
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 67531/01
• EGMR, 01.10.2020 - 67531/01

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 67531/01

  It prohibits in absolute terms inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances and the victim's behaviour (see, among many other authorities, V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 69, ECHR 1999-IX, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).

  To assess this evidence, the Court adopts the standard of proof "beyond reasonable doubt" but adds that such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 121, ECHR 2000-IV).

• EGMR, 16.12.1999 - 24888/94

  Mord an James Bulger

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 67531/01

  It prohibits in absolute terms inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the circumstances and the victim's behaviour (see, among many other authorities, V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, § 69, ECHR 1999-IX, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV).

Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GORSHKOV v. UKRAINE

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 13 MRK
  Violation of Art. 5-4 Not necessary to examine under Art. 13 (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 15.06.2004 - 67531/01
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 67531/01
• EGMR, 01.10.2020 - 67531/01

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 04.04.2000 - 26629/95

  WITOLD LITWA c. POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 67531/01

  The Court notes in respect of the detention of persons of unsound mind (Article 5 § 1(e) of the Convention) that they "may be deprived of their liberty either in order to be given medical treatment or because of considerations dictated by social policy, or on both medical and social grounds... [A] predominant reason why the Convention allows the persons mentioned in Article 5 § 1(e) to be deprived of their liberty is not only that they are dangerous for public safety, but also that their own interests may necessitate their detention" (see Litwa v. Poland, no. 26629/95, § 60, ECHR 2000-III).
• EGMR, 12.05.1992 - 13770/88

  MEGYERI c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 67531/01

  Although it is not always necessary that the procedure under Article 5 § 4 be attended by the same guarantees as those required under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention for criminal or civil litigation (see Megyeri v. Germany, judgment of 12 May 1992, Series A no. 237-A, p. 11, § 22), it must have a judicial character and provide guarantees appropriate to the kind of deprivation of liberty in question.
• EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73

  WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 67531/01

  The Court reiterates that the object and purpose of Article 5 § 1, which is the lex generalis in relation to Article 5 § 4, is to ensure that no one should be deprived of his/her liberty in an arbitrary fashion; consequently, quite apart from conformity with domestic law, "no detention that is arbitrary can ever be regarded as lawful" (see Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, pp. 16 and 18, §§ 37 and 39).

• EGMR, 17.12.2013 - 24086/03

  RAUDEVS v. LATVIA

  It reiterates the principles under Article 5 § 4, namely that persons subjected to compulsory medical treatment are entitled to institute court proceedings to test the lawfulness of their detention (see, among other authorities, Winterwerp, cited above, §§ 60-61), and that the access to such proceedings should not depend on the goodwill of the detaining authority (see Rakevich v. Russia, no. 58973/00, § 44, 28 October 2003, and Gorshkov v. Ukraine, no. 67531/01, § 44, 8 November 2005).
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 44290/07

  SABEVA v. BULGARIA

  With regard to the second of those conditions, the Court observes that the persons mentioned in Article 5 § 1 (e) may be deprived of their liberty in order to, inter alia, be given medical treatment, that is, not only because they are a danger to the public but also because their own interests may necessitate their detention (see Guzzardi v. Italy, 6 November 1980, § 98 in fine, Series A no. 39; Witold Litwa v. Poland, no. 26629/95, § 60, ECHR 2000-III; Koniarska v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 33670/96, 12 October 2000; and Gorshkov v. Ukraine, no. 67531/01, § 37, 8 November 2005).