Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KASHAVELOV v. BULGARIA

  Art. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 41 MRK
  No violations of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 3 (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 13 Non-pecuniary damage - award Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 891/05
• EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05
• EGMR, 06.06.2013 - 891/05

Wird zitiert von ...Zitiert selbst (10)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 08.04.2004 - 71503/01

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  Nor do they make it necessary or appropriate to grant consequential relief of the sort requested by him (contrast Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, §§ 202-03, ECHR 2004-II).
• EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00

  MIFSUD contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  A remedy is effective if it prevents the alleged violation or its continuation or provides adequate redress for any breach that has already occurred (ibid., § 158, and Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, ECHR 2002-VIII).
• EGMR, 22.10.2009 - 27207/04

  YANKOV AND MANCHEV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  The reasonableness of that period must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and having regard to the criteria laid down in the Court's case-law: the complexity of the case and the conduct of the applicant and of the relevant authorities (see, as a recent authority, Yankov and Manchev v. Bulgaria, nos. 27207/04 and 15614/05, § 20, 22 October 2009).

• EGMR, 14.11.2002 - 67263/01

  MOUISEL v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  In this regard, it is important to consider, for instance, the danger of the person's absconding or causing injury or damage (see Raninen v. Finland, judgment of 16 December 1997, § 56, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VIII; Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 47, ECHR 2002-IX; Hénaf v. France, no. 65436/01, § 48, ECHR 2003-XI; and Mathew v. the Netherlands, no. 24919/03, § 180, ECHR 2005-IX).
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

  KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  He did not submit statements by co-detainees (contrast Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, §§ 71 and 113, ECHR 2005-X (extracts), and Gavazov v. Bulgaria, no. 54659/00, §§ 59 and 94, 6 March 2008), or by other persons who might possess relevant information, such as visiting relatives.
• EKMR, 09.07.1981 - 8463/78

  KRÖCHER AND MÖLLER v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  Referring to Kröcher and Möller v. Switzerland (no. 8463/78, Commission's report of 16 December 1982, Decisions and Reports (DR) 34, p. 24), they argued that the measures taken in respect of the applicant did not amount to inhuman or degrading treatment.
• EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 44290/07

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  In the specific circumstances, the Court must treat the applicant's assertions with certain caution, because he might have a tendency to exaggerate the inadequacy of the conditions in prison partly because he has a negative attitude towards an establishment in which he considers he should have never been detained (see, mutatis mutandis, Sabeva v. Bulgaria, no. 44290/07, § 41, 10 June 2010, citing B. v. the United Kingdom, no. 6870/75, Commission's report of 7 October 1981, DR 32, p. 29, §§ 174-75).
• EGMR, 15.12.2005 - 47823/99

  GEORGIEV c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  Nor did he submit medical evidence showing the impact of the conditions in which he was kept on his physical or psychological well-being (compare Georgiev v. Bulgaria, no. 47823/99, § 64, 15 December 2005, and contrast Staykov v. Bulgaria, no. 49438/99, § 41, 12 October 2006).
• EKMR, 14.05.1977 - 6870/75

  Y. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  In the specific circumstances, the Court must treat the applicant's assertions with certain caution, because he might have a tendency to exaggerate the inadequacy of the conditions in prison partly because he has a negative attitude towards an establishment in which he considers he should have never been detained (see, mutatis mutandis, Sabeva v. Bulgaria, no. 44290/07, § 41, 10 June 2010, citing B. v. the United Kingdom, no. 6870/75, Commission's report of 7 October 1981, DR 32, p. 29, §§ 174-75).
• EKMR, 18.10.1985 - 11224/84

  EWING c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.01.2011 - 891/05

  It takes that date as the beginning of the period under consideration (see Ewing v. the United Kingdom, no. 11224/84, Commission's report of 6 October 1987, DR 56, p. 71, at pp. 84-85, § 145).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• BVerfG, 19.01.2023 - 2 BvR 1719/21

  Erfolgreiche Verfassungsbeschwerde eines Sicherungsverwahrten gegen die …

  Maßgeblich zu berücksichtigen ist, ob die Fesselung angeordnet wurde, obwohl der Gefangene durch sein Verhalten während der Haft in der Vergangenheit keinen Grund zu Beanstandungen gegeben hat (vgl. EGMR, Shlykov and others v. Russia, Urteil vom 19. Januar 2021, Nr. 78638/11, §§ 72 ff.; Kashavelov v. Bulgaria, Urteil vom 20. Januar 2011, Nr. 891/05, §§ 38 ff.; Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine, Urteil vom 14. März 2013, Nr. 28005/08, § 154).

  Das routinemäßige Fesseln eines Gefangenen, der sich in einer gesicherten Umgebung befindet, kann nicht gerechtfertigt werden (vgl. EGMR, Kashavelov v. Bulgaria, Urteil vom 20. Januar 2011, Nr. 891/05, § 39 f.).