Source: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=EGMR&Datum=29.05.2012&Aktenzeichen=41716/08
Timestamp: 2019-05-22 10:06:14
Document Index: 440222192

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 49', '§ 128', '§ 76', '§ 102', '§ 74', '§ 49', '§ 49', '§ 49', '§ 73', '§ 49', '§ 95', '§ 67', '§ 49', '§ 95', '§ 67', '§ 49', '§ 95', '§ 67', '§ 49', '§ 54', '§ 50', '§ 93', '§ 29']

EGMR, 29.05.2012 - 41716/08 - dejure.org
https://dejure.org/2012,15706
EGMR, 29.05.2012 - 41716/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,15706)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 29.05.2012 - 41716/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,15706)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 29. Mai 2012 - 41716/08 (https://dejure.org/2012,15706)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,15706) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
For that reason, the Court is unable to entertain the claims which the respondent Government raised for the first time in the proceedings before it (see, mutatis mutandis, Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, § 49, 29 May 2012; Aleksandr Makarov v. Russia, no. 15217/07, § 128, 12 March 2009; Megadat.com SRL v. Moldova, no. 21151/04, § 76, ECHR 2008; Sarban v. Moldova, no. 3456/05, § 102, 4 October 2005; and Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 74, 30 January 2003).
A lack or deficiency of reasons in the domestic decisions cannot be supplemented ex post facto in the proceedings before the Court, for the Court cannot take the place of the national courts that considered the issue of the litigant's appearance before the court (see, mutatis mutandis, Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, § 49, 29 May 2012).
41716/08.
Accordingly, the Government's new reasons, which were raised for the first time in the proceedings before the Court, will not be taken into account (see Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, § 49, 29 May 2012, with further references).
Accordingly, the Government's reasons raised for the first time in the proceedings before the Court, cannot be taken into account (see, amongst many others, Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, § 49, 29 May 2012).
EGMR, 07.06.2018 - 8784/11
SEJDIJI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
As the Government submitted, other facts that could have supported the authorities" conclusion about the applicant's potential to abscond might have existed, however, they were not mentioned in the detention orders and it is not the Court's task to establish such facts and take the place of the national authorities who ruled on the issue of detention (see Yuriy Yakovlev v. Russia, no. 5453/08, § 73, 29 April 2010, and Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, § 49, 29 May 2012).
As to the intended redress to be provided to the applicant, the Court is satisfied that the amount of compensation proposed is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases (see Yuriy Yakovlev v. Russia, no. 5453/08, § 95, 29 April 2010; Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, § 67, 29 May 2012; or Kislitsa v. Russia, no. 29985/05, § 49, 19 June 2012).
As to the intended redress to be provided to the applicants, the Court is satisfied that the amount of compensation proposed is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases (see Yuriy Yakovlev v. Russia, no. 5453/08, § 95, 29 April 2010; Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, § 67, 29 May 2012; or Kislitsa v. Russia, no. 29985/05, § 49, 19 June 2012).
As to the intended redress to be provided to the applicant, the Court is satisfied that the amount of compensation proposed is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases (see Yuriy Yakovlev v. Russia, no. 5453/08, § 95, 29 April 2010; Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, § 67, 29 May 2012; and Kislitsa v. Russia, no. 29985/05, § 49, 19 June 2012).
EGMR, 19.01.2016 - 42618/07
KLYACHIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
The Court is satisfied that the proposed sums are not unreasonable in comparison with the awards made by the Court in similar cases (see Dolgova v. Russia, no. 11886/05, §§ 54-56, 2 March 2006; Shcheglyuk v. Russia, no. 7649/02, §§ 50-53, 14 December 2006; Yuriy Yakovlev v. Russia, no. 5453/08, §§ 93-95, 29 April 2010; Valeriy Kovalenko v. Russia, no. 41716/08, 29 May 2012; Kislitsa v. Russia, no. 29985/05, 19 June 2012; and, by contrast, Topcic-Rosenberg v. Croatia, no. 19391/11, § 29, 14 November 2013).
EGMR, 22.11.2016 - 16346/08
VAVILIN AND AVOYAN v. RUSSIA
EGMR, 27.09.2016 - 59989/11
EGMR, 20.09.2016 - 58968/09
TEDORADZE v. RUSSIA
EGMR, 06.09.2016 - 16209/10
EGMR, 28.06.2016 - 46958/12
PUTENEV v. RUSSIA
EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 23751/06
KLIMENTYEV AND NADTOCHIYEV v. RUSSIA