Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PAVLOVA v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life);Violation of Article 13+8-1 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  PAVLOVA v. RUSSIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 13 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (24)Zitiert selbst (11)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 30.06.2015 - 41418/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  This principle applies a fortiori to untried prisoners who must be considered innocent by virtue of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention (see Trosin v. Ukraine, no. 39758/05, § 39, 23 February 2012; Khoroshenko v. Russia [GC], no. 41418/04, §§ 116-17, ECHR 2015, and Andrey Smirnov v. Russia, no. 43149/10, §§ 35-36, 13 February 2018).
• EGMR, 09.04.2019 - 18255/10

  TOMOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  The existence of a structural deficiency which - in the absence of effective domestic remedies - forces large groups of people to seek redress in the Court for repetitive violations of their Convention rights, is a relevant consideration for deciding whether the Court should continue examination of the case (see Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 98-100, 9 April 2019).
• EGMR, 01.07.2014 - 29920/05

  GERASIMOV v. RUSSIA and 14 other applications

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  29920/05 and 10 others, § 130, 1 July 2014; and Jeronovičs v. Latvia [GC], no. 44898/10, §§ 64-71, 5 July 2016).

• EGMR, 24.04.2008 - 1365/07

  Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, Schutz von Ehe und Familie, Ausweisung, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  In cases involving Article 8 of the Convention, this means that the authority has to carry out a balancing exercise and examine whether the interference with the applicant's rights answered a pressing social need and was proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued, that is, whether it amounted to a justifiable limitation of his rights (see C.G. and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 1365/07, § 62, 24 April 2008, and Voynov v. Russia, no. 39747/10, § 42, 3 July 2018).
• EGMR, 13.02.2018 - 43149/10

  SMIRNOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  This principle applies a fortiori to untried prisoners who must be considered innocent by virtue of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention (see Trosin v. Ukraine, no. 39758/05, § 39, 23 February 2012; Khoroshenko v. Russia [GC], no. 41418/04, §§ 116-17, ECHR 2015, and Andrey Smirnov v. Russia, no. 43149/10, §§ 35-36, 13 February 2018).
• EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 33172/16

  CHALDAYEV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  It does nothing to limit the scope of the discretion and the manner of its exercise, and deprives the detainee of the minimum degree of protection against arbitrariness or abuse to which citizens are entitled under the rule of law in a democratic society (see Vlasov v. Russia, no. 78146/01, §§ 125-26, 12 June 2008; Moiseyev, cited above, §§ 249-50; Andrey Smirnov, cited above, §§ 40-42, and, most recently, Resin v. Russia, no. 9348/14, §§ 36-38, 18 December 2018, and Chaldayev v. Russia, no. 33172/16, §§ 60-61, 28 May 2019).
• EGMR, 18.12.2018 - 9348/14

  RESIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  It does nothing to limit the scope of the discretion and the manner of its exercise, and deprives the detainee of the minimum degree of protection against arbitrariness or abuse to which citizens are entitled under the rule of law in a democratic society (see Vlasov v. Russia, no. 78146/01, §§ 125-26, 12 June 2008; Moiseyev, cited above, §§ 249-50; Andrey Smirnov, cited above, §§ 40-42, and, most recently, Resin v. Russia, no. 9348/14, §§ 36-38, 18 December 2018, and Chaldayev v. Russia, no. 33172/16, §§ 60-61, 28 May 2019).
• EGMR, 03.07.2018 - 39747/10

  VOYNOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  In cases involving Article 8 of the Convention, this means that the authority has to carry out a balancing exercise and examine whether the interference with the applicant's rights answered a pressing social need and was proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued, that is, whether it amounted to a justifiable limitation of his rights (see C.G. and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 1365/07, § 62, 24 April 2008, and Voynov v. Russia, no. 39747/10, § 42, 3 July 2018).
• EGMR, 27.10.2022 - 72792/17

  BIKBULATOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  The Court has recently received a number of applications concerning the same restrictions on prison visits in the same regional court and the absence of domestic remedies for that grievance (see Ionov and Others v. Russia, no. 34663/17 and 9 Others, communicated on 26 October 2018, and Bikbulatov v. Russia, no. 72792/17, communicated on 10 December 2018).
• EGMR - 34663/17 (anhängig)

  IONOV v. RUSSIA and 9 other applications

  Auszug aus EGMR, 18.02.2020 - 8578/12

  The Court has recently received a number of applications concerning the same restrictions on prison visits in the same regional court and the absence of domestic remedies for that grievance (see Ionov and Others v. Russia, no. 34663/17 and 9 Others, communicated on 26 October 2018, and Bikbulatov v. Russia, no. 72792/17, communicated on 10 December 2018).
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 60627/09

  YUNZEL v. RUSSIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 06.02.2025 - 66647/17

  GOLUBEV v. RUSSIA

  Rn. 7 The Court has already established in earlier cases against Russia that, in the absence of any factual elements pointing to the danger posed by the prisoner or to the existence of a security risk, the automatic application of restrictions on family visits, including a refusal of short-term visits to prisoners detained in pre-trial detention facilities, cannot be justified as being "necessary in a democratic society" and amounted to a violation of Article 8 of the Convention (see Andrey Smirnov v. Russia, no. 43149/10, §§ 32-57, 13 February 2018, and Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, §§ 21-28, 18 February 2020).

  Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that it also discloses a violation of the Convention in the light of its findings in Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, §§ 29-33, 18 February 2020, regarding the lack of effective remedies to challenge the refusals of family visits.

• EGMR, 14.12.2021 - 53404/18

  MUKHAMETOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  The Court has held that a legal provision which does not define the scope of the discretion or the manner of its exercise deprives the prisoner of the minimum degree of protection against arbitrariness or abuse to which citizens are entitled under the rule of law in a democratic society (see Vlasov, §§ 123-27; Moiseyev, §§ 248-51; Andrey Smirnov, §§ 40-42; Chaldayev, §§ 60-62; Kungurov, §§ 18-19, all cited above; Resin v. Russia, no. 9348/14, §§ 36-38, 18 December 2018; and Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, §§ 24-26, 18 February 2020).
• EGMR, 09.10.2025 - 74995/17

  PLATON v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  This principle applies equally to untried prisoners who must be considered innocent by virtue of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention (ibid., §§ 116-117, and Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, § 23, 18 February 2020).

• EGMR, 12.09.2024 - 8936/20

  SAUTIYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  27057/06 and 2 others, 2 July 2019, concerning permanent video surveillance of detainees and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; Andrey Smirnov v. Russia, no. 43149/10, §§ 35-57, 13 February 2018, and Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, §§ 29-33, 18 February 2020, as regards restrictions on family visits in detention facilities and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; and Chaldayev v. Russia, no. 33172/16, §§ 69-83, 28 May 2019, concerning discriminatory treatment as regards family visits in pre-trial detention facilities).
• EGMR, 06.06.2024 - 2282/21

  SHAYDULLIN v. RUSSIA and 24 other aplications

  2653/13 and 60980/14, §§ 123-28, 4 October 2016, where extreme overcrowding inside the glass cabin led the Court to the conclusion of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention; Andrey Smirnov v. Russia, no. 43149/10, §§ 35-57, 13 February 2018 and Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12,18 February 2020, as regards restrictions on family visits in detention facilities and lack of effective remedies; Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 07.03.2024 - 12166/19

  ZHDANOV v. RUSSIA and 41 other applications

  27057/06 and 2 others, §§ 58-110, 2 July 2019, concerning permanent video surveillance of detainees and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; and Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, §§ 21-33, 18 February 2020, concerning restrictions on family visits in pre-trial detention facilities and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect.
• EGMR, 11.01.2024 - 11278/19

  TRANDA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its well-established case-law (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), as regards placement in a metal cage during court hearings; Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013, concerning inadequate conditions of post-conviction detention and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; Tomov and Others, cited above, §§ 92-156, concerning the lack of an effective remedy in respect of the complaints about inadequate conditions of transport; and Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, §§ 29-33, 18 February 2020, concerning restrictions on family visits in pre-trial detention facilities and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect).
• EGMR, 23.11.2023 - 12205/18

  PONOMAREV v. RUSSIA and 44 other applications

  27057/06 and 2 others, 2 July 2019, concerning permanent video surveillance of detainees and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, §§ 31-33, 18 February 2020, as regards the lack of an effective remedy in respect of restrictions on family visits; and Chaldayev, cited above, §§ 69-83, related to discriminatory treatment as regards family visits in pre-trial detention facilities).
• EGMR, 30.11.2023 - 41090/18

  RESIN v. RUSSIA and 6 other applications

  18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 92-156, 9 April 2019, concerning inadequate conditions of transport and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, 18 February 2020, concerning restrictions on family visits in pre-trial detention facilities and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; Chaldayev v. Russia, no. 33172/16, §§ 69-83, 28 May 2019, related to discriminatory treatment as regards family visits in pre-trial detention facilities).
• EGMR, 16.01.2025 - 30580/21

  URAZALIN v. RUSSIA and 30 other applications

  18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 92-156, 9 April 2019, concerning inadequate conditions of transport and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; Gorlov and Others, cited above, concerning the absence of an effective domestic remedy to complain about permanent video surveillance in detention facilities; Pshibiyev and Berov v. Russia, no. 63748/13, 9 June 2020, and Pavlova v. Russia, no. 8578/12, 18 February 2020, concerning restrictions on family visits in pre-trial detention facilities and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; and Anchugov and Gladkov v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 05.09.2024 - 50599/16

  CHAPODZE v. RUSSIA and 10 other applications
• EGMR, 27.06.2024 - 60846/15

  RUDIK AND PISKUNOV v. RUSSIA and 8 other applications
• EGMR, 11.01.2024 - 56727/18

  KAYUMOVY v. RUSSIA and 8 other applications
• EGMR, 10.11.2022 - 24453/17

  YELISTRATOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.03.2025 - 2945/18

  YALAKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.10.2022 - 2113/20

  BRITVIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 13.10.2022 - 39095/17

  PAVLOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 10.07.2025 - 42870/16

  TINGAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.02.2025 - 71537/17

  BIKBULATOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 12.10.2023 - 82939/17

  TAKÓ v. HUNGARY and 1 other application
• EGMR, 27.10.2022 - 72792/17

  BIKBULATOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.10.2022 - 3079/18

  KUZNETSOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 21.07.2022 - 17010/18

  SUNGATOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 27.10.2022 - 79809/17

  GOVOROV v. RUSSIA