Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DOHERTY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Speediness of review) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  DOHERTY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. a MRK
  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 18.02.2016 - 76874/11
• EGMR, 18.01.2017 - 76874/11

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (6)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 19.01.2012 - 39472/07

  [FRE]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2016 - 76874/11

  39472/07 and 39474/07, § 94, 19 January 2012).
• EGMR, 27.03.2008 - 44009/05

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2016 - 76874/11

  It is not the Court's task to inquire into what would be the most appropriate system of review in the sphere under examination (see Shtukaturov v. Russia, no. 44009/05, § 123, ECHR 2008).
• EGMR, 01.06.2006 - 7064/05

  MAMEDOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2016 - 76874/11

  However, the Court has repeatedly stated that where an individual's personal liberty is at stake, it has very strict standards concerning the State's compliance with the requirement of speedy review of the lawfulness of detention (see, for example, Mamedova v. Russia, no. 7064/05, § 96, 1 June 2006, where the length of appeal proceedings lasting twenty-six days was found to be in breach of the "speediness" requirement of Article 5 § 4).

• EGMR, 27.07.2010 - 24340/08

  Abschiebungshaft, Malta, Rechtsweggarantie, effektiver Rechtsschutz, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2016 - 76874/11

  The notion of "lawfulness" under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention has the same meaning as in Article 5 § 1, so that the arrested or detained person is entitled to a review of the "lawfulness" of his detention in light not only of the requirements of domestic law, but also of the Convention, the general principles embodied therein and the aim of the restrictions permitted by Article 5 § 1 (see E. v. Norway, 29 August 1990, § 50, Series A no. 181, Louled Massoud v. Malta, no. 24340/08, § 39, 27 July 2010; and Rahmani and Dineva v. Bulgaria, no. 20116/08, § 75, 10 May 2012).
• EGMR, 09.01.2003 - 55263/00

  KADEM v. MALTA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2016 - 76874/11

  The remedies must be made available during a person's detention with a view to that person obtaining a speedy judicial review of the lawfulness of his or her detention capable of leading, where appropriate, to his or her release (see Kadem v. Malta, no. 55263/00, § 41, 9 January 2003 and Raza v. Bulgaria, no. 31465/08, § 76, 11 February 2010).
• EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 17233/08

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2016 - 76874/11

  In this regard, he relied on In Re McCabe [2007] NICA 35, in which the Court of Appeal had accepted that the Life Sentence Review Board was not an Article 5 § 4-compliant body (see also McCabe v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 17233/08, 26 June 2012, § 15).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen