Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BELEVITSKIY v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3, Art. 13, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Preliminary objection dismissed (non-exhaustion) Violation of Art. 3 Violation of Art. 5-1-c Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 5-4 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings Costs and ...

Wird zitiert von ... (188)Zitiert selbst (20)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

  KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see, in particular, Mamedova, cited above, § 62 et seq.; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 104 et seq., 8 November 2005; Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, § 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, § 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, § 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI).

  It has held that the practice of keeping defendants in detention without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period without judicial authorisation - was incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and the protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see Korchuganova v. Russia, no. 75039/01, § 57, 8 June 2006; Nakhmanovich v. Russia, no. 55669/00, §§ 67-68, 2 March 2006; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146-148, ECHR 2005-...; Jecius, cited above, §§ 60-64, and Baranowski, cited above, §§ 53-58).

  This is particularly true in the Russian legal system where the characterisation in law of the facts - and thus the sentence faced by the applicant - is determined by the prosecution without judicial review of the issue whether the evidence that has been obtained supports a reasonable suspicion that the applicant has committed the alleged offence (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 180, 8 November 2005).

• EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 62208/00

  LABZOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  The Court has frequently found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the lack of personal space afforded to detainees (see, in particular, Mamedova, cited above, § 62 et seq.; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 104 et seq., 8 November 2005; Labzov v. Russia, no. 62208/00, § 44 et seq., 16 June 2005; Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, § 41 et seq., 2 June 2005; Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, § 39 et seq., 20 January 2005; and Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, §§ 97 et seq., ECHR 2002-VI).

  The Court has examined the validity of the reservation and found it compatible with the requirements of Article 57 of the Convention (see Labzov v. Russia (dec.), no. 62208/00, 28 February 2002).

• EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  The Court therefore rejects the applicant's claim in respect of Mrs Liptser's fees (see, mutatis mutandis, Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 26 November 1991, Series A no. 216, § 80).

• EGMR, 10.02.1995 - 15175/89

  ALLENET DE RIBEMONT c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  The Court reiterates that the principle of presumption of innocence prohibits the premature expression by the tribunal of the opinion that the person charged with the criminal offence is guilty before he has been so proved according to law (see Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, § 41).
• EGMR, 08.06.2006 - 75039/01

  KORCHUGANOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  It has held that the practice of keeping defendants in detention without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period without judicial authorisation - was incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and the protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see Korchuganova v. Russia, no. 75039/01, § 57, 8 June 2006; Nakhmanovich v. Russia, no. 55669/00, §§ 67-68, 2 March 2006; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146-148, ECHR 2005-...; Jecius, cited above, §§ 60-64, and Baranowski, cited above, §§ 53-58).
• EGMR, 26.07.2001 - 33977/96

  ILIJKOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  Nor can continuation of the detention be used to anticipate a custodial sentence (see Panchenko, cited above § 102; Ilijkov v. Bulgaria, no. 33977/96, § 81, 26 July 2001; and Letellier v. France, judgment of 26 June 1991, Series A no. 207, § 51).
• EGMR, 02.03.2006 - 55669/00

  NAKHMANOVICH v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  It has held that the practice of keeping defendants in detention without a specific legal basis or clear rules governing their situation - with the result that they may be deprived of their liberty for an unlimited period without judicial authorisation - was incompatible with the principles of legal certainty and the protection from arbitrariness, which are common threads throughout the Convention and the rule of law (see Korchuganova v. Russia, no. 75039/01, § 57, 8 June 2006; Nakhmanovich v. Russia, no. 55669/00, §§ 67-68, 2 March 2006; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 146-148, ECHR 2005-...; Jecius, cited above, §§ 60-64, and Baranowski, cited above, §§ 53-58).
• EGMR, 26.06.1991 - 12369/86

  LETELLIER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  Nor can continuation of the detention be used to anticipate a custodial sentence (see Panchenko, cited above § 102; Ilijkov v. Bulgaria, no. 33977/96, § 81, 26 July 2001; and Letellier v. France, judgment of 26 June 1991, Series A no. 207, § 51).
• EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 17977/91

  KAMPANIS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  The possibility for a detainee to be heard either in person or through some form of representation features among the fundamental guarantees of procedure applied in matters of deprivation of liberty (see Kampanis v. Greece, judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 318-B, § 47).
• EGMR, 24.02.1983 - 7525/76

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 72967/01

  This part of the claim must also be rejected (see, mutatis mutandis, Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom (Article 50), judgment of 24 February 1983, Series A no. 59, § 22).
• EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 36743/97

  GRAUSLYS v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 15.07.2002 - 47095/99

  Russland, Haftbedingungen, EMRK, Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, …
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 28358/95

  BARANOWSKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 20.01.2005 - 63378/00

  MAYZIT v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 09.03.2006 - 59261/00

  MENECHEVA c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 02.06.2005 - 66460/01

  NOVOSELOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 01.06.2006 - 7064/05

  MAMEDOVA v. RUSSIA
• EKMR, 06.09.1995 - 24559/94

  GIBAS c. POLOGNE
• EGMR, 27.01.2005 - 75386/01

  KSENZOV v. RUSSIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 14.03.2017 - 47287/15

  Ungarn wegen Inhaftierung von Flüchtlingen verurteilt

  The conditions of Article 31/A of the Asylum Act were not met and no formal decision was taken; furthermore no special grounds for detention in the transit zone were provided for in Article 71/A. In this connection the Court would reiterate that it has considered the absence of any grounds given by the judicial authorities in their decisions authorising detention for a prolonged period of time, as in the present case to be incompatible with the principle of the protection from arbitrariness enshrined in Article 5 § 1 (see Sta?.aitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, § 67, 21 March 2002; Nakhmanovich v. Russia, no. 55669/00, § 70, 2 March 2006; Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, § 91, 1 March 2007, and Mooren v. Germany [GC], no 11364/03, § 79, 9 July 2009).
• EGMR, 09.07.2009 - 11364/03

  Rechtmäßigkeit der Untersuchungshaft (rechtsfehlerhafter Haftbefehl; Recht auf …

  März 2006; und Belevitskiy ./. Russland, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 72967/01, Randnr. 91, 1.
• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 42525/07

  [ENG]

  Starting with the Kalashnikov judgment in 2002, the Court has to date found a violation of the obligation to guarantee a trial within a reasonable time or release pending trial, under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, in more than eighty cases against Russia where the domestic courts extended an applicant's detention relying essentially on the gravity of the charges and employing the same stereotyped formulae, without addressing specific facts or considering alternative preventive measures (see, among many other authorities, Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, §§ 99 et seq., 1 March 2007; Mamedova, cited above, §§ 72 et seq.; Dolgova v. Russia, no. 11886/05, §§ 38 et seq., 2 March 2006; Khudoyorov, cited above, §§ 172 et seq.; Rokhlina v. Russia, no. 54071/00, §§ 63 et seq., 7 April 2005; Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, §§ 91 et seq., 8 February 2005; and Smirnova v. Russia, nos.

  Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, 1 March 2007 (IZ-77/3, Moscow, 2001-2002).

• EGMR, 15.12.2016 - 16483/12

  Lampedusa-Haft war illegal

  Thus, in such cases, the Court has found a violation of Article 3 where the lack of space went together with other poor material conditions of detention such as: a lack of ventilation and light (see Torreggiani and Others, cited above, § 69; see also Babushkin v. Russia, no. 67253/01, § 44, 18 October 2007; Vlasov v. Russia, no. 78146/01, § 84, 12 June 2008; and Moiseyev v. Russia, no. 62936/00, §§ 124-27, 9 October 2008); limited access to outdoor exercise (see István Gábor Kovács v. Hungary, no. 15707/10, § 26, 17 January 2012) or a total lack of privacy in the cell (see Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 32 and 40-43, 2 June 2005; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 106-07, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); and Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, §§ 73-79, 1 March 2007).
• EGMR, 01.09.2015 - 16483/12

  Zum Umgang mit Flüchtlingen in Lampedusa; unmenschliche Behandlung; unzulässige …

  Aussi, même dans des affaires où chaque détenu disposait de 3 à 4 m², la Cour a conclu à la violation de l'article 3 dès lors que le manque d'espace s'accompagnait d'un manque de ventilation et de lumière (Torreggiani et autres, précité, § 69 ; voir également Babouchkine c. Russie, no 67253/01, § 44, 18 octobre 2007 ; Vlassov c. Russie, no 78146/01, § 84, 12 juin 2008 ; et Moisseiev, précité, §§ 124-127) ; d'un accès limité à la promenade en plein air (István Gábor Kovács c. Hongrie, no 15707/10, § 26, 17 janvier 2012) ou d'un manque total d'intimité dans les cellules (Novosselov c. Russie, no 66460/01, §§ 32 et 40-43, 2 juin 2005 ; Khoudoyorov c. Russie, no 6847/02, §§ 106-107, CEDH 2005-X (extraits) ; et Belevitski c. Russie, no 72967/01, §§ 73-79, 1er mars 2007).
• EGMR, 09.10.2008 - 62936/00

  MOISEYEV v. RUSSIA

  According to the Court's constant case-law, although the severity of the sentence faced by the applicant is a relevant element in the assessment of the risk of absconding, the need to continue the deprivation of liberty cannot be assessed from a purely abstract point of view, taking into consideration only the gravity of the offence (see Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, § 101, 1 March 2007; Ilijkov v. Bulgaria, no. 33977/96, § 81, 26 July 2001; and Letellier v. France, judgment of 26 June 1991, Series A no. 207, § 51).
• EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 32631/09

  Fall Magnitski: Russland verletzte mehrfach Menschenrechte

  The Court has considered the absence of any grounds given by the judicial authorities in their decisions authorising detention for a prolonged period of time to be incompatible with the principle of the protection from arbitrariness enshrined in Article 5 § 1 (see Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, § 91, 1 March 2007; Nakhmanovich v. Russia, no. 55669/00, § 70, 2 March 2006; and Stašaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, § 67, 21 March 2002).
• EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 35972/05

  [ENG]

  Thus, even in cases where a larger prison cell was at issue - measuring in the range of 3 to 4 square metres per inmate - the Court found a violation of Article 3 since the space factor was coupled with the established lack of ventilation and lighting (see, for example, Babushkin v. Russia, no. 67253/01, § 44, 18 October 2007; Ostrovar v. Moldova, no. 35207/03, § 89, 13 September 2005; and Peers, cited above, §§ 70-72) or the lack of basic privacy in the prisoner's everyday life (see, mutatis mutandis, Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, §§ 73-79, 1 March 2007; Valasinas, cited above, § 104; Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 106-107, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); and Novoselov v. Russia, no. 66460/01, §§ 32 and 40-43, 2 June 2005).
• EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 2944/06

  [ENG]

  57947/00, 57948/00 and 57949/00, § 90, 24 February 2005; Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, § 59, 1 March 2007; and Umayevy v. Russia, no. 47354/07, § 94, 12 June 2012).
• EGMR, 23.07.2013 - 55352/12

  Verstoß Maltas gegen Art. 3 EMRK

  93. While it is true that the Court has previously found that the fact that an applicant was obliged to live, sleep and use the toilet in the same cell with so many other inmates [70] was itself sufficient to cause distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the Article 3 threshold (see for example Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, § 77, 1 March 2007), in the circumstances of the present case, it does not appear to be the case.
• EGMR, 20.10.2011 - 5774/10

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 31.10.2013 - 20824/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 07.09.2017 - 8844/12

  Stollenwerk ./. Deutschland: Konventionsverletzung durch Ablehnung einer …
• EGMR, 03.03.2011 - 5235/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 21503/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 25664/05

  LIND v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 28.06.2011 - 20197/03

  MIMINOSHVILI v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 38726/05

  PELEVIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 22.12.2008 - 46468/06

  ALEKSANYAN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 22.10.2009 - 17885/04

  ORCHOWSKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 26.11.2009 - 13591/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 40258/03

  YUDAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 25.11.2014 - 64682/12

  Rumänischer Ex-Häftling erhält von Belgien 10.000EUR wegen schlechter …
• EGMR, 19.12.2013 - 55299/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 22475/05

  DOLGOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 22.10.2009 - 20756/04

  ISAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 03.12.2019 - 23190/17

  PETRESCU c. PORTUGAL et 4 autres affaires
• EGMR, 05.02.2015 - 46404/13

  KHLOYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 11.12.2014 - 1253/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 27.11.2014 - 51857/13

  AMIROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 01.04.2010 - 67413/01

  GULTYAYEVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.01.2009 - 37048/04

  GIORGI NIKOLAISHVILI v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 19.03.2009 - 30033/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 25.10.2007 - 15825/06

  YAKOVENKO v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 28.05.2009 - 2052/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 03.02.2026 - 4743/21

  Russland wegen Nawalny-Inhaftierung verurteilt: "Muster der Missachtung von …
• EGMR, 22.12.2015 - 68736/11

  LYKOVA c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 38623/03

  PICHUGIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 23.04.2009 - 36941/02

  GUBKIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 07.06.2018 - 9096/09

  ABASHEV CONTRE LA RUSSIE ET 122 AUTRES AFFAIRES
• EGMR, 08.10.2015 - 38887/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 26.02.2015 - 22405/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 07.01.2014 - 3363/08

  LAKATOS AND OTHERS v. SERBIA
• EGMR, 27.01.2009 - 1704/06

  RAMISHVILI AND KOKHREIDZE v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 12.06.2008 - 78146/01

  VLASOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 25.10.2007 - 38971/06

  KORSHUNOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 28.04.2015 - 6858/11

  DELIJORGJI v. ALBANIA
• EGMR, 03.03.2011 - 6110/03

  KUPTSOV AND KUPTSOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 25.06.2015 - 36229/11

  ISAYEVA v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 27.01.2011 - 42224/02

  KRIVOSHAPKIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 23.04.2009 - 14370/03

  MOSKOVETS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 23.04.2009 - 1606/02

  POPOV AND VOROBYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 03.07.2008 - 7188/03

  CHEMBER v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 04.10.2022 - 4261/06

  KUDAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.06.2013 - 591/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 05.02.2013 - 46108/11

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 40107/02

  KHARCHENKO v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 15.12.2015 - 17249/12

  SZAFRA?ƒSKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 30.07.2013 - 19730/10

  TOMA BARBU v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 57319/10

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 35297/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 02.12.2010 - 7782/04

  KOVALEVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 02.12.2010 - 8609/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 26127/03

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 01.07.2010 - 42998/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 32327/06

  POPKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 24.07.2014 - 75068/12

  DRAGIN v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 20641/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 14.10.2010 - 24271/03

  GEORGIY BYKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 72250/01

  LOPATA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 14.01.2010 - 23610/03

  MELNIKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 19.03.2009 - 6270/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 13.09.2022 - 30694/15

  BASER c. TURQUIE et 1 autre affaire
• EGMR, 26.11.2019 - 2991/06

  BELUGIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 09.04.2019 - 32394/11

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 05.06.2014 - 16115/13

  MARGARETIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 22.04.2014 - 73869/10

  CASTALDO c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 17.10.2013 - 33023/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 11.04.2013 - 17828/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 9643/03

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 43368/04

  ISAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.05.2010 - 18768/05

  SAGHINADZE AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 23.02.2010 - 14824/02

  SYCHEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 13659/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 7739/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 3194/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 26.03.2009 - 36551/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 12.02.2009 - 3811/02

  DENISENKO AND BOGDANCHIKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 12.06.2008 - 3223/07

  ALEKSEY MAKAROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.05.2008 - 67542/01

  GUSEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 25.10.2007 - 42940/06

  GOVORUSHKO v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.06.2024 - 615/21

  CVIKOVÁ v. SLOVAKIA and 2 other applications
• EGMR, 22.06.2023 - 10794/12

  GERMANO v. ITALY
• EGMR, 28.09.2021 - 31231/06

  LYUPAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 35880/14

  ZAKHAROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 07.09.2017 - 68250/11

  EROL v. GERMANY
• EGMR, 12.06.2012 - 47354/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 19.04.2012 - 2452/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 04.10.2011 - 31725/04

  BADILA v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 02.12.2010 - 56305/08

  GETOS-MAGDIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 75330/01

  SHARKUNOV AND MEZENTSEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 08.04.2010 - 40523/08

  PESA v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 18.03.2010 - 18299/03

  FINOGENOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 30.07.2009 - 19223/04

  VLADIMIR FEDOROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 16.07.2009 - 16854/03

  TSARKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.05.2018 - 6312/13

  LUTSKEVICH v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 08.02.2018 - 33566/11

  RAMKOVSKI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
• EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 20933/08

  MAGOMEDOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 01.12.2015 - 26211/13

  SOS v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 36461/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 05.03.2013 - 15434/11

  TELLISSI c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 13.03.2012 - 39549/02

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 20.09.2011 - 39602/05

  FEDORENKO v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.01.2011 - 24460/04

  SHANIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 19.03.2009 - 13541/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 1750/03

  ANDREYEVSKIY v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 31.07.2008 - 3522/04

  SALMANOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 29.07.2008 - 11830/03

  GHARIBASHVILI v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 12.11.2015 - 48416/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 09.10.2012 - 26436/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 18.10.2011 - 46793/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 15.07.2010 - 27672/03

  BURYAGA v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 17.12.2019 - 44240/12

  YAKOVLEV v. RUSSIA and 2 other applications
• EGMR, 15.10.2019 - 52673/07

  GRIGORYEV c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 17.05.2016 - 8049/07

  NEKRASOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 24.11.2015 - 38415/13

  KOVACEVIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 27.11.2012 - 48562/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 25.09.2012 - 67341/10

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 33619/04

  SOKURENKO v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.03.2011 - 33123/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 13.04.2023 - 14709/07

  MAYBORODA v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 10.01.2023 - 72144/14

  IVANOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 31.03.2022 - 26627/05

  KARIMBAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.12.2020 - 41229/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 23.07.2020 - 29760/15

  LAUTARU ET SEED c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 17.03.2016 - 27791/09

  DIDOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 12.11.2015 - 41800/13

  FILIPPOPOULOS c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 58040/08

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 24.06.2014 - 50027/08

  PETKOV AND PROFIROV v. BULGARIA AND PETKOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 57180/09

  BERNOBIC v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 31.05.2011 - 49905/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 20326/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 05.04.2011 - 10393/04

  NIKOLAY FEDOROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 08.07.2010 - 14797/02

  ALEKSANDR MATVEYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.06.2010 - 38031/04

  SHULENKOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 13173/02

  MUKHUTDINOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 24.04.2008 - 3947/03

  SILIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 21.02.2008 - 18123/04

  MATSKUS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 586/08 (anhängig)

  YANCHURKIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 01.03.2022 - 4561/17

  ASPIOTIS c. GRÈCE
• EGMR, 22.09.2020 - 43411/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 09.01.2018 - 47230/11

  BOGOSYAN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 22.11.2016 - 7955/07

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 12.11.2015 - 22458/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 23.04.2015 - 33803/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 19.12.2013 - 56111/12

  ORBAN v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 22.10.2013 - 20427/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 12.06.2012 - 29448/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 03.05.2012 - 6479/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 03.04.2012 - 22921/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 25.11.2010 - 4320/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 07.10.2010 - 25432/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 23.10.2007 - 39835/05

  TURCAN AND TURCAN v. MOLDOVA
• EGMR, 07.11.2024 - 8436/21

  LAVORGNA v. ITALY
• EGMR, 08.12.2022 - 45538/14

  KARNAUKHOV c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 07.12.2021 - 23435/12

  DERKACHEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 21.01.2020 - 11617/10

  NAUMOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 25.07.2017 - 37498/14

  KUC v. SLOVAKIA
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 11214/07

  BOYCHUK v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 11.04.2013 - 45373/05

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 24.01.2012 - 15811/03

  VYATKIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 4663/05

  SOLTYSYAK v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 15.07.2010 - 9487/02

  MEDVEDEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 35411/05

  PETR PONOMAREV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 28.05.2009 - 28827/02

  ISAYEV v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 24.03.2009 - 40795/04

  DEYNEKO v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 26.06.2007 - 1704/06

  RAMISHVILI AND KOKHREIDZE v. GEORGIA
• EGMR, 10.03.2020 - 71862/13

  KRIVOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 02.06.2015 - 26344/06

  AFONICHEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 14.01.2014 - 40521/06

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 27.06.2013 - 4157/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 05.07.2011 - 15120/10

  KRACZKIEWICZ AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 4176/03

  DANILIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 17.11.2020 - 63821/16

  WIERZBICKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 06.11.2018 - 18877/12

  ORLOWSKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 02.06.2015 - 68495/12

  PACULA c. BELGIQUE
• EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 23684/06

  KHANBIKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 22.06.2021 - 60333/10

  SHILOV v. RUSSIA