Neue Kooperation: dejure.org × Doctrine bringen KI-Power für Aktenanalyse, Recherche und Texterstellung. Doctrine entdecken
×

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05, 8705/05, 8742/05   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2007,57472
EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05, 8705/05, 8742/05 (https://dejure.org/2007,57472)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 27.03.2007 - 8721/05, 8705/05, 8742/05 (https://dejure.org/2007,57472)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 27. März 2007 - 8721/05, 8705/05, 8742/05 (https://dejure.org/2007,57472)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2007,57472) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    ISTRATII v. MOLDOVA

    Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41 MRK
    Violations of Art. 3 Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 5-4 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (29)Zitiert selbst (19)

  • EGMR, 04.10.2005 - 3456/05

    SARBAN v. MOLDOVA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    The relevant domestic law has been set out in the case of Sarban v. Moldova (no.3456/05, §§ 51-56, 4 October 2005).

    The demands of the Bar Association were refused (see Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 126, 4 October 2005).

  • EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

    LABITA c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed 'special diligence' in the conduct of the proceedings" (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 153, ECHR 2000-IV).
  • EGMR, 24.10.1979 - 6301/73
    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    The guarantees provided in Article 6 concerning access to a lawyer have been found to be applicable in habeas corpus proceedings (see for example Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, judgment of 24 October 1979, Series A no. 33, § 60).
  • EGMR, 13.05.1980 - 6694/74
    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    Indeed, if a lawyer were unable to confer with his client and receive confidential instructions from him without surveillance, his assistance would lose much of its usefulness, whereas the Convention is intended to guarantee rights that are practical and effective (see, inter alia, the Artico v. Italy judgment of 13 May 1980, Series A no. 37, p. 16, § 33).
  • EGMR, 30.03.1989 - 10444/83
    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    (c) The proceeedings must be adversarial and must always ensure "equality of arms" between the parties (see Lamy v. Belgium, judgment of 30 March 1989, Series A no. 151, § 29).
  • EGMR, 12.05.1992 - 13770/88
    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    (b) Although it is not always necessary that the procedure under Article 5 § 4 be attended by the same guarantees as those required under Article 6 of the Convention for criminal or civil litigation, it must have a judicial character and provide guarantees appropriate to the kind of deprivation of liberty in question (see, for instance, Assenov and Others v. Bulgaria, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII, p. 3302, § 162, and Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, § 125, ECHR 2000-XI, both with reference to Megyeri v. Germany, judgment of 12 May 1992, Series A no. 237-A, p. 11, § 22).
  • EGMR, 24.11.1993 - 13972/88

    IMBRIOSCIA c. SUISSE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    Article 6 has been found to have some application at the pre-trial stage (see, for instance, Imbrioscia v. Switzerland, judgment of 24 November 1993, Series A no. 275, p. 13, § 36, and John Murray v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 8 February 1996, Reports, 1996-I, p. 54, § 62) during which the review of the lawfulness of pre-trial detention typically takes place.
  • EGMR, 25.03.1992 - 13590/88

    CAMPBELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    The Court recalls that it has previously held that confidential communication with one's lawyer is protected by the Convention as an important safeguard of one's right to defence (see, for instance, Campbell v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 25 March 1992, Series A no. 233, § 46 and Recommendation Rec(2006)2 (see paragraph 31 above)).
  • EGMR, 29.02.1988 - 9106/80
    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    In Bouamar v. Belgium, (judgment of 29 February 1988, Series A no. 129, § 60), the Court held that it was essential not only that the individual concerned should have the opportunity to be heard in person but that he should also have the effective assistance of his lawyer.
  • EGMR, 04.12.1979 - 7710/76

    Schiesser ./. Schweiz

    Auszug aus EGMR, 27.03.2007 - 8721/05
    In case of a person whose detention falls within the ambit of Article 5 § 1(c) a hearing is required (see Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II; Assenov and Others, cited above, § 162, with references to Schiesser v. Switzerland, judgment of 4 December 1979, Series A no. 34, p. 13, §§ 30-31; Sanchez-Reisse v. Switzerland, judgment of 21 October 1986, Series A no. 107, p. 19, § 51; and Kampanis v. Greece, judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 318-B, p. 45, § 47).
  • EGMR, 21.10.1986 - 9862/82
  • EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 17977/91

    KAMPANIS v. GREECE

  • EGMR, 13.09.2005 - 35207/03

    OSTROVAR v. MOLDOVA

  • EGMR, 20.07.2004 - 18882/02

    CROITORU v. MOLDOVA

  • EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

    Ableitung einer allgemeinen Verpflichtung zur Entlassung eines …

  • EGMR, 19.04.2001 - 28524/95

    PEERS v. GREECE

  • EGMR, 28.01.1994 - 17549/90
  • EGMR, 05.04.2005 - 54825/00

    NEVMERZHITSKY v. UKRAINE

  • EGMR, 02.12.2011 - 67263/01

    AFFAIRES MOUISEL ET HENAF CONTRE LA FRANCE

  • EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 35972/05

    [ENG]

    Moreover, the State's obligation under Article 3 of the Convention to protect the physical well-being of persons deprived of their liberty has been interpreted as including an obligation to provide them with the requisite medical assistance (see, for instance, Hurtado v. Switzerland, judgment of 28 January 1994, Series A no. 280-A, opinion of the Commission, pp. 15-16, § 79; Kudla cited above, § 94; and Istratii and Others v. Moldova, no. 8721/05, 8705/05 and 8742/05, § 49, 27 March 2007).
  • EGMR, 20.10.2011 - 5774/10

    [ENG]

    While it is aware of the fact that the overcrowding could adversely affect services within the prison, including the security system and health care, the Court cannot ignore that the applicants failed to provide any information about any incident involving violence or the threat of violence which might have affected them, nor did they give details of any inadequately answered need for medical or psychological assistance, either on a regular basis or in an emergency (see, for example, Visloguzov, cited above, §§ 48-9; Istratii and Others v. Moldova, nos. 8721/05, 8705/05 and 8742/05, § 49, 27 March 2007; and Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 105, ECHR 2001-VIII).
  • EGMR, 20.10.2011 - 5903/10

    STRUCL AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA

    This also applies to the applicant Mr Strucl's allegations concerning a lack of an adequate response to his alleged suicidal tendencies, in respect of which the applicant provided no details (see, for example, Visloguzov, cited above, §§ 48-9; Istratii and Others v. Moldova, nos. 8721/05, 8705/05 and 8742/05, § 49, 27 March 2007; and Valasinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, §§ 105 and 110, ECHR 2001-VIII).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
dejure.org Übersicht EGMR
dejure.org nutzen ohne Ablenkung
Werbung abschalten. Jetzt buchen! Keine automatische Verlängerung.
Info zum PUR-Angebot
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht