Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MÎRCA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA

  No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) (the Republic of Moldova);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect) (Russia);No violation of Article 5 ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  MÎRCA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA

  Art. 1, Art. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. 1, Art. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Zitiert selbst (5)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 19.10.2012 - 43370/04

  Transnistrien

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2021 - 7845/06

  The applicants' father, C.M., participated in the 1992 military conflict on the banks of the Nistru river on the side of the Moldovan authorities and against the forces of the self-proclaimed "Moldovan Republic of Transnistria" (the "MRT" (the "MRT" - see for more details Ilaşcu and Others v. Moldova and Russia ([GC], no. 48787/99, §§ 28-185, ECHR 2004-VII) and Catan and Others v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia ([GC], nos. 43370/04, 8252/05 and 18454/06, §§ 8-42, ECHR 2012).

  The Court notes that the parties in the present case have positions concerning the matter of jurisdiction which are similar to those expressed by the parties in Catan and Others v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia ([GC], nos. 43370/04, 8252/05 and 18454/06, §§ 83-101, ECHR 2012 and in Mozer (cited above, §§ 81-95).

• EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 11138/10

  Transnistrien

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2021 - 7845/06

  The relevant materials have been summarised in Mozer v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia [GC] (no. 11138/10, §§ 61-77, ECHR 2016).
• EGMR, 15.11.2011 - 23687/05

  IVANTOC AND OTHERS v. MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2021 - 7845/06

  The Court also found in subsequent cases concerning the Transdniestrian region that up until July 2010, the "MRT" was only able to continue to exist, and to resist Moldovan and international efforts to resolve the conflict and bring democracy and the rule of law to the region, because of Russian military, economic and political support (see Ivanţoc and Others v. Moldova and Russia, no. 23687/05, § 116-20, 15 November 2011; Catan and Others, cited above, §§ 121-22; and Mozer, cited above, §§ 108 and 110).
• EGMR, 30.05.2017 - 22200/10

  VARDANEAN v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2021 - 7845/06

  The Russian Government argued that the Court's findings made in Mozer (cited above) and Vardanean v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (no. 22200/10, § 39, 30 May 2017) were based on the findings in Ilaşcu and Others (cited above), which in turn was based on a report written in 1994 by two persons at the request of the OSCE.
• EGMR, 29.05.2018 - 1089/09

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 27.04.2021 - 7845/06

  The Court considers that Moldovan authorities did not have any real means of improving the conditions of detention in the "MRT" prisons, nor could they move the applicants to other prisons (see, a contrario, Pocasovschi and Mihaila v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia, no. 1089/09, § 46, 29 May 2018).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 13.07.2021 - 48145/10

  CILEI c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA ET RUSSIE

  The Court notes that the first applicant lodged his application in 2010, shortly after his conviction, and cannot be faulted for the time that has passed since then (Mîrca v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia, no. 7845/06, § 60, 27 April 2021).
• EGMR, 13.07.2021 - 767/12

  SHAPOVAL v. RUSSIA

  The Court notes that the applicant's allegations had not been disputed and that the censorship of correspondence in the "MRT" prisons has already been established (Ivanţoc and Others, cited above, §§ 140-143; Braga, cited above, § 65; Mîrca v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia, no. 7845/06, § 76, 27 April 2021; Alimpiev v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia, no. 48802/08, § 61, 27 April 2021).