Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  CSOMA v. ROMANIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Positive obligations Article 8-1 - Respect for private life) (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 8759/05
• EGMR, 13.04.2016 - 8759/05
• EGMR - 8759/05

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

• EGMR, 05.10.2006 - 75725/01

  TROCELLIER v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 8759/05

  In particular, it reiterates that the Contracting States are under an obligation to introduce regulations compelling both public and private hospitals to adopt appropriate measures for the protection of their patients" lives (see Trocellier v. France (dec.), no. 75725/01, § 4, ECHR 2006-XIV).
• EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96

  CALVELLI ET CIGLIO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 8759/05

  Lastly, the Court reiterates that in the specific sphere of medical negligence, if the legal system affords victims full access to civil proceedings or to disciplinary proceedings which may lead to liability for medical negligence being established and a corresponding award of compensation, this could in principle be sufficient to discharge the State's positive obligation to provide an effective judicial system (see, mutatis mutandis, Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, §§ 48-51, ECHR 2002-I, and Codarcea, cited above, § 102).
• EGMR, 12.02.2004 - 47287/99

  PEREZ c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 8759/05

  The Court notes that in the instant case the applicant attached a civil claim to her criminal complaint against the doctor (see paragraph 15 above, as well as Perez v. France [GC], no. 47287/99, § 70, ECHR 2004-I).
• EGMR, 08.07.2004 - 53924/00

  Schutz des ungeborenen Lebens durch EMRK - Schwangerschaftsabbruch nach …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 8759/05

  In particular, as a corollary to this, if a foreseeable risk of this nature materialises without the patient having been duly informed in advance by doctors, the State Party concerned may be directly liable under Article 8 for this lack of information (see Trocellier, cited above, § 4; Vo v. France [GC], no. 53924/00, § 89, ECHR 2004-VIII; Codarcea, cited above, § 105; and Pretty, cited above, § 63).
• EGMR, 29.04.2002 - 2346/02

  Vereinbarkeit der strafrechtlichen Verfolgung der Beihilfe zum Selbstmord mit der …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 8759/05

  It will therefore examine the complaint under Article 8 of the Convention (see Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, §§ 61 and 63, ECHR 2002-III, and Codarcea, cited above, § 101), which reads as follows:.

• EGMR, 17.03.2016 - 23796/10

  VASILEVA v. BULGARIA

  It is now well established that although the right to health is not as such among the rights guaranteed under the Convention or its Protocols (see Fiorenza v. Italy (dec.), no. 44393/98, 28 November 2000; Pastorino and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 17640/02, 11 July 2006; and Dossi and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 26053/07, 12 October 2010), the High Contracting Parties have, parallel to their positive obligations under Article 2 of the Convention, a positive obligation under its Article 8, firstly, to have in place regulations compelling both public and private hospitals to adopt appropriate measures for the protection of their patients" physical integrity and, secondly, to provide victims of medical negligence access to proceedings in which they could, in appropriate cases, obtain compensation for damage (see Trocellier v. France (dec.), no. 75725/01, ECHR 2006-XIV; Benderskiy v. Ukraine, no. 22750/02, §§ 61-62, 15 November 2007; Codarcea v. Romania, no. 31675/04, §§ 102-03, 2 June 2009; Yardimci v. Turkey, no. 25266/05, §§ 55-57, 5 January 2010; Spyra and Kranczkowski v. Poland, no. 19764/07, §§ 82 and 86-87, 25 September 2012; Csoma v. Romania, no. 8759/05, §§ 41 and 43, 15 January 2013; and S.B. v. Romania, no. 24453/04, §§ 65-66, 23 September 2014).
• EGMR, 03.06.2014 - 20192/07

  E.M. AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  The Court has also found it unacceptable that an operation could be performed without observing the rules and the safeguards created by the domestic system itself in this respect (see Csoma v. Romania, no. 8759/05, § 57, 15 January 2013).