Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,22595) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ZDJELAR AND OTHERS v. CROATIA
No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect) (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (10)
- EGMR, 29.01.2002 - 38587/97
BAYRAM and YILDIRIM v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
Furthermore, it is also meant to protect the authorities and other parties concerned from being left in a state of uncertainty for a prolonged period of time (see Bayram and Yildirim v. Turkey (dec.), no. 38587/97, ECHR 2002-III, and Bulut and Yavuz v. Turkey (dec.), no. 73065/01, 28 May 2002). - EGMR, 28.05.2002 - 73065/01
BULUT and YAVUZ v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
Furthermore, it is also meant to protect the authorities and other parties concerned from being left in a state of uncertainty for a prolonged period of time (see Bayram and Yildirim v. Turkey (dec.), no. 38587/97, ECHR 2002-III, and Bulut and Yavuz v. Turkey (dec.), no. 73065/01, 28 May 2002). - EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93
MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
A requirement of promptness and reasonable expedition is implicit in this context (see Yasa v. Turkey, 2 September 1998, §§ 102-104, Reports 1998-VI; and Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, §§ 106-107, ECHR 2003-III).
- EGMR, 10.04.2001 - 26129/95
TANLI v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
In so far as this complaint falls within its competence ratione temporis, the Court reiterates that while a family member of a "disappeared person" can claim to be a victim of treatment contrary to Article 3 (see Kurt v. Turkey, 25 May 1998, §§ 130-34, Reports 1998-III), the same principle would not usually apply to situations where the person taken into custody has later been found dead (see, for example, Tanli v. Turkey, no. 26129/95, § 159, ECHR 2001-III (extracts)). - EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 38361/97
ANGUELOVA v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
The object and purpose of the Convention as an instrument for the protection of individual human beings require that Article 2 be interpreted and applied so as to make its safeguards practical and effective (see, among many other authorities, Anguelova v. Bulgaria, no. 38361/97, § 109, ECHR 2002-IV). - EGMR, 09.11.2006 - 69480/01
LOULOUÏEV ET AUTRES c. RUSSIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
Given these circumstances, the Court is not persuaded that in the present case, despite its gruesome circumstances, the applicants sustained the uncertainty, anguish and distress characteristic of the specific phenomenon of disappearances (see, by contrast, Luluyev and Others v. Russia, no. 69480/01, § 115, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts)). - EGMR, 27.11.2007 - 32457/04
BRECKNELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
However, where events took place far in the past, due to the lapse of time, the level of urgency may have diminished; the immediacy of required investigative steps in the aftermath of an incident is likely to be absent (see Brecknell v. the United Kingdom, no. 32457/04, §§ 79-81, 27 November 2007). - EGMR, 15.02.2011 - 4704/04
PALIC v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
60441/13 et all, § 21, 11 March 2014; see also Palic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 4704/04, § 70, 15 February 2011 concerning complex post-conflict situations). - EGMR, 15.04.2012 - 29520/09
[ENG]
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
I have explained in detail my position on this issue in my separate opinions to the judgments in the cases of Janowiec and Others v. Russia ([GC], nos. 55508/07 and 29520/09, ECHR 2013) and Mocanu and Others v. Romania ([GC], nos. 10865/09 and 2 others, ECHR 2014 (extracts)). - EGMR, 11.03.2014 - 60441/13
GÜRTEKIN AND OTHERS v. CYPRUS
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 80960/12
60441/13 et all, § 21, 11 March 2014; see also Palic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 4704/04, § 70, 15 February 2011 concerning complex post-conflict situations).
- EGMR, 28.04.2022 - 78836/16
BURSAC AND OTHERS v. CROATIA
In previous cases where the applicants complained that the domestic courts had dismissed their claims for compensation for wartime damage as time-barred, the Court has found no breach of their right of access to a court (see Bogdanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 72254/11, 18 March 2014; Oric v. Croatia (dec.), no. 50203/12, 13 May 2014; B. and Others v. Croatia, no. 71593/11, § 84, 18 June 2015; and Zdjelar and Others v. Croatia, no. 80960/12, § 103, 6 July 2017). - EGMR, 19.06.2018 - 52577/15
TODOROVIC v. CROATIA
The Court, being master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case, will examine this complaint under Article 2 of the Convention alone (compare Treskavica v. Croatia, no. 32036/13, § 31, 12 January 2016; Cindric and Be?.lic v. Croatia, no. 72152/13, § 52, 6 September 2016; Borojevic and Others v. Croatia, no. 70273/11, § 32, 4 April 2017; M. and Others v. Croatia, no. 50175/12, § 52, 2 May 2017; Trivkanovic v. Croatia, no. 12986/13, § 43, 6 July 2017; and Zdjelar and Others v. Croatia, no. 80960/12, § 51, 6 July 2017) which, in so far as relevant, reads as follows:.
Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 09.06.2015 - 56094/12, 74338/12, 75187/12, 80960/12, 3430/13, 32023/13, 32036/13, 38882/13 |
Zitiervorschläge
EGMR, 09.06.2015 - 56094/12, 74338/12, 75187/12, 80960/12, 3430/13, 32023/13, 32036/13, 38882/13 (https://dejure.org/2015,15826)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 09.06.2015 - 56094/12, 74338/12, 75187/12, 80960/12, 3430/13, 32023/13, 32036/13, 38882/13 (https://dejure.org/2015,15826)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 09. Juni 2015 - 56094/12, 74338/12, 75187/12, 80960/12, 3430/13, 32023/13, 32036/13, 38882/13 (https://dejure.org/2015,15826)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,15826) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
Sonstiges
Wird zitiert von ... (3) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 28.05.2002 - 73065/01
BULUT and YAVUZ v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2015 - 56094/12
Furthermore, it ought also to protect the authorities and other persons concerned from being under any uncertainty for a prolonged period of time (see Bayram and Yildirim v. Turkey (dec.), no. 38587/97, ECHR 2002-III, and Bulut and Yavuz v. Turkey (dec.), no. 73065/01, 28 May 2002). - EGMR, 23.02.1999 - 41400/98
MONFORTE SANCHO, GARCIA MORENO, ROIG ESPERT, ROIG ESPERT ET ICARDO GARCIA contre …
- EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91
McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2015 - 56094/12
The Court reiterates that the obligation to protect the right to life under Article 2 of the Convention, read in conjunction with the State's general duty under Article 1 of the Convention to secure to everyone within its jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in the Convention, also requires by implication that there should be some form of effective official investigation when individuals have been killed as a result of the use of force (see, mutatis mutandis, McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324, § 161; and Kaya v. Turkey, 19 February 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I, § 86; and Paul and Audrey Edwards, cited above, § 69). - EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70
GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2015 - 56094/12
Contracting States enjoy a certain margin of appreciation in that respect but the ultimate decision as to the observance of the Convention's requirements rests with the Court (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 January 1975, §§ 34 in fine and 35-36, Series A no. 18, and Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, §§ 91-93, ECHR 2001-V). - EGMR, 29.01.2002 - 38587/97
BAYRAM and YILDIRIM v. TURKEY
Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2015 - 56094/12
Furthermore, it ought also to protect the authorities and other persons concerned from being under any uncertainty for a prolonged period of time (see Bayram and Yildirim v. Turkey (dec.), no. 38587/97, ECHR 2002-III, and Bulut and Yavuz v. Turkey (dec.), no. 73065/01, 28 May 2002).
- EGMR, 06.09.2016 - 72152/13
CINDRIC AND BESLIC v. CROATIA
The Court observes that in a number of cases concerning ongoing investigations into the deaths of applicants" relatives it has examined the period of time from which the applicant could or should start doubting the effectiveness of a remedy and its bearing on the six-month time-limit provided for in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Sükran Aydin and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 46231/99, 26 May 2005; Elsanova v. Russia (dec.) no. 57952/00, 15 November 2005; Narin v. Turkey, no. 18907/02, § 50, 15 December 2009; Grubic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 56094/12, §§ 30-41, 9 June 2015; Zarkovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 75187/12, §§ 24-35, 9 June 2015; Damjanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 5306/13, §§ 23-34, 25 August 2015; and Vukovic and Others v. Croatia (dec.), no. 3430/13, §§ 23-34, 25 August 2015). - EGMR, 19.06.2018 - 52577/15
TODOROVIC v. CROATIA
In applying the six-month time-limit for lodging an application in such cases, the following periods between the last relevant procedural step on the part of the national authorities and lodging the applications with the Court have been considered too lengthy: in the cases of Radicanin v. Croatia ((dec.), no. 75504/12, § 29, 19 May 2015) and Grubic v. Croatia it was over nine years ((dec.), no. 56094/12, § 24, 9 June 2015); in Aydin and Others v. Turkey ((dec.), no. 46231/99, 26 May 2005) it was about seven years; and in Bulut and Yavuz v. Turkey ((dec.), no. 73065/01, 28 May 2002) it was about six years. - EGMR, 22.11.2016 - 73223/14
IVANEZA AND OTHERS v. CROATIA
In a number of cases against Croatia concerning ongoing investigations into the deaths of the applicants" relatives, the Court has examined the period of time from which the applicant could or should have started doubting the effectiveness of investigation (see Bogdanovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 722541/11, 18 March 2014; Oric v. Croatia, no. 50203/12, 13 May 2014; Gojevic-Zrnic and Mancic v. Croatia (dec)., no. 5676/13, 17 March 2015; Radicanin and Others v. Croatia (dec.), no. 75504/12; Grubic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 56094/12, 9 June 2015; Babic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 74338/12, 24 November 2015; Lovric and Others v. Croatia (dec.), no. 57849/13, 12 January 2016; Ribic and Others (dec.), no. 21610/13, 12 January 2016; Savic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 32023/13, 12 January 2016; Opacic and Godic Croatia (dec.), no. 28882/13, 26 January 2016; and Ivancic and Dzelajlija v. Croatia (dec.), no. 62916/13, 15 March 2016).