Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SOLDATENKO v. UKRAINE

  Art. 3, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. f, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 13, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1 MRK
  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Preliminary objections dismissed Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 3 (in case of extradition to Turkmenistan) Violation of Art. 13 Violation of Art. 5-1 Violation of ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07
• EGMR, 05.09.2018 - 2440/07

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EGMR, 22.03.1995 - 18580/91

  QUINN c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  Therefore, Article 5 § 1 (c) and, accordingly, Article 5 § 3 of the Convention are not applicable in the present case (see Quinn v. France, judgment of 22 March 1995, Series A no. 311, § 53).
• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

  Jens Söring

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  In so far as any liability under the Convention is or may be incurred, it is liability incurred by the extraditing Contracting State by reason of its having taken action which has as a direct consequence the exposure of an individual to proscribed ill-treatment (see Soering v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 161, pp. 35-36, §§ 89-91; Garabayev v. Russia, cited above, § 73).
• EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87

  VILVARAJAH ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  In cases such as the present the Court must examine the foreseeable consequences of sending the applicant to the receiving country, bearing in mind the general situation there and his personal circumstances (see Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, § 108 in fine).

 
• EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 1948/04

  Somalia, Abschiebungshindernis, zielstaatsbezogene Abschiebungshindernisse, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  The applicant referred to the Court's judgment in the case of Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands (no. 1948/04, § 147, ECHR 2007-... (extracts)), in which it had found that there would be a violation of Article 3 if the applicant returned to Somalia, since the national authorities could not guarantee his security.
• EGMR, 31.07.2000 - 34578/97

  JECIUS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  "Quality of law" in this sense implies that where a national law authorises deprivation of liberty it must be sufficiently accessible, precise and foreseeable in its application, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 125, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III; and Amuur, cited above).
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 28358/95

  BARANOWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  "Quality of law" in this sense implies that where a national law authorises deprivation of liberty it must be sufficiently accessible, precise and foreseeable in its application, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 125, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III; and Amuur, cited above).
• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 6847/02

  KHOUDOÏOROV c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  "Quality of law" in this sense implies that where a national law authorises deprivation of liberty it must be sufficiently accessible, precise and foreseeable in its application, in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness (see Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 125, ECHR 2005-X (extracts); Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 56, ECHR 2000-IX; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 50-52, ECHR 2000-III; and Amuur, cited above).
• EGMR, 24.03.2005 - 9808/02

  STOICHKOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  The existence of the remedy required by Article 5 § 4 must be sufficiently certain, not only in theory but also in practice, failing which it will lack the accessibility and effectiveness required for the purposes of that provision (see, mutatis mutandis, Stoichkov v. Bulgaria, no. 9808/02, § 66 in fine, 24 March 2005, and Vachev v. Bulgaria, no. 42987/98, § 71, ECHR 2004-VIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 08.07.2004 - 42987/98

  VACHEV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  The existence of the remedy required by Article 5 § 4 must be sufficiently certain, not only in theory but also in practice, failing which it will lack the accessibility and effectiveness required for the purposes of that provision (see, mutatis mutandis, Stoichkov v. Bulgaria, no. 9808/02, § 66 in fine, 24 March 2005, and Vachev v. Bulgaria, no. 42987/98, § 71, ECHR 2004-VIII (extracts)).
• EGMR, 11.10.2007 - 656/06

  NASRULLOYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 2440/07

  In Nasrulloyev v. Russia (no. 656/06, §§ 72-77, 11 October 2007) the Court established that Chapter 54 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Russia ("Extradition of a person for criminal prosecution or execution of sentence"), which did not set up special procedure of arrest and detention with a view to extradition but referred to the procedure of arrest and detention on remand, created confusion among the national authorities as to its application.
• EGMR, 07.06.2007 - 38411/02

  GARABAYEV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 31.05.2001 - 67679/01

  KATANI ET AUTRES contre l'ALLEMAGNE

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 06.07.2015 - C-237/15

  Lanigan

  Vgl. insoweit EGMR, Soldatenko/Ukraine, 23. Oktober 2008, Nr. 2440/07, § 112, sowie Toniolo/San Marino und Italien, 26. Juni 2012, Nr. 44853/10, § 46.
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 27.10.2016 - C-640/15

  Vilkas

  27 - Urteile des EGMR vom 23. Oktober 2008, Soldatenko/Ukraine (CE:ECHR:2008:1023JUD000244007, Rn. 112), und vom 26. Juni 2012, Toniolo/San Marino und Italien (…CE:ECHR:2012:0626JUD004485310, Rn. 46 bis 50).
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 04.05.2017 - C-18/16

  K.

  Diese Auffassung wird durch die Rechtsprechung des EGMR gestützt (vgl. z. B. Urteil des EGMR vom 23. Oktober 2008, Soldatenko/Ukraine, CE:ECHR:2008:1023JUD000244007, § 109).