Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  TIGRAN AYRAPETYAN v. RUSSIA

  Art. 3, Art. 38, Art. 38 Abs. 1, Art. 38 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 38-1-a Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (procedural aspect) Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 05.03.2009 - 75472/01
• EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  Having regard to the applicant's young age, the seriousness of the violations of the Convention as well as to its established case-law (see Mikheyev v. Russia, no. 77617/01, § 163, 26 January 2006, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 123, ECHR 1999-V), the Court awards the applicant EUR 35, 000 for non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable on that amount.
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  The effective official investigation should be capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Assenov and Others, 28 October 1998, § 102, Reports 1998-VIII, and Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336, and Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII).

 
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 22277/93

  ILHAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  Given these considerations and in view of the Convention case­law in this respect and in particular the criteria of severity and the purpose of the ill-treatment (see, among other authorities, Ä°lhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, § 85, ECHR 2000-VII), the Court is satisfied that the accumulation of the acts of physical violence inflicted on the applicant amounted to torture in breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
• EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57947/00

  ISSAIEVA, YOUSSOUPOVA ET BAZAÏEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  The minimum standards as to effectiveness defined by the Court's case-law also include the requirements that the investigation must be independent, impartial and subject to public scrutiny and that the competent authorities must act with exemplary diligence and promptness (see, for example, Isayeva and Others v. Russia, nos. 57947/00, 57948/00 and 57949/00, §§ 208-13, 24 February 2005).
• EGMR, 24.02.2005 - 57948/00

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  The minimum standards as to effectiveness defined by the Court's case-law also include the requirements that the investigation must be independent, impartial and subject to public scrutiny and that the competent authorities must act with exemplary diligence and promptness (see, for example, Isayeva and Others v. Russia, nos. 57947/00, 57948/00 and 57949/00, §§ 208-13, 24 February 2005).
• EGMR, 26.01.2006 - 77617/01

  MIKHEYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  Having regard to the applicant's young age, the seriousness of the violations of the Convention as well as to its established case-law (see Mikheyev v. Russia, no. 77617/01, § 163, 26 January 2006, and Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 123, ECHR 1999-V), the Court awards the applicant EUR 35, 000 for non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable on that amount.
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  Indeed, the burden of proof may be regarded as resting on the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation (see Ribitsch v. Austria, 4 December 1995, § 34, Series A no. 336, and Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 22.04.1992 - 12351/86

  VIDAL c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  The Court further reiterates that, being sensitive to the subsidiary nature of its role and cautious in taking on the role of a first-instance tribunal of fact, it is nevertheless not bound by the findings of domestic courts and may depart from them where this is rendered unavoidable by the circumstances of a particular case (see, by contrast, Edwards v. the United Kingdom, 16 December 1992, § 34, Series A no. 247-B; see also Matyar v. Turkey, no. 23423/94, § 108, 21 February 2002, and Vidal v. Belgium, 22 April 1992, §§ 33 and 34, Series A no. 235-B).
• EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13071/87

  EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 75472/01

  The Court further reiterates that, being sensitive to the subsidiary nature of its role and cautious in taking on the role of a first-instance tribunal of fact, it is nevertheless not bound by the findings of domestic courts and may depart from them where this is rendered unavoidable by the circumstances of a particular case (see, by contrast, Edwards v. the United Kingdom, 16 December 1992, § 34, Series A no. 247-B; see also Matyar v. Turkey, no. 23423/94, § 108, 21 February 2002, and Vidal v. Belgium, 22 April 1992, §§ 33 and 34, Series A no. 235-B).