Source: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=EGMR&Datum=04.03.2008&Aktenzeichen=42722/02
Timestamp: 2019-05-21 08:04:25
Document Index: 40852774

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 3', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 14', 'Art. 29', 'Art. 29', 'Art. 41', 'Art. 14', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 14', '§ 80', '§ 69', '§ 153', '§ 85', '§ 128', '§ 80', '§ 80', '§ 16', '§ 101', '§ 140', '§ 141', '§ 116', '§ 71', '§ 119', '§ 322', '§ 66', '§ 99', '§ 100', '§ 67', '§ 131', '§ 70', '§ 178', '§ 100', '§ 67', '§ 48', '§ 145', '§ 63', '§ 126']

EGMR, 04.03.2008 - 42722/02 - dejure.org
https://dejure.org/2008,58356
EGMR, 04.03.2008 - 42722/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,58356)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04.03.2008 - 42722/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,58356)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04. März 2008 - 42722/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,58356)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2008,58356) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Art. 3, Art. 13, Art. 14, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41, Art. 14+3 MRK
Violation of Art. 3 No violation of Art. 13 Violation of Art. 14+3 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - award Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (englisch)
De plus, il ne ressort pas du dossier et le requérant n'a pas indiqué aux autorités internes ou à la Cour que les policiers impliqués dans l'incident avaient proféré des propos racistes au moment des faits (Celniku, précité, § 80 ; Vasil Sashov Petrov c. Bulgarie, no 63106/00, § 69, 10 juin 2010; et, a contrario, Natchova, précité, § 153, Osman c. Bulgarie, no 43233/98, §§ 85 et 86, 16 février 2006; Stoica c. Roumanie, no 42722/02, § 128, 4 mars 2008; et Turan Cakir c. Belgique, no 44256/06, § 80, 10 mars 2009).
Voir, parmi d'autres, Stoica c. Roumanie, no 42722/02, §§ 80, 81 et 132, 4 mars 2008 ; Gergely c. Roumanie, no 57885/00, §§ 16 et 25, CEDH 2007-V ; Cobzaru, précité, § 101 ; et Moldovan et autres c. Roumanie (no 2), nos 41138/98 et 64320/01, § 140, CEDH 2005-VII.
EGMR, 17.05.2018 - 1167/15
ZABELOS AND OTHERS v. GREECE
Relying on the judgments of the Court in Stoica v. Romania (no. 42722/02, 4 March 2008), Galotskin v. Greece (no. 2945/07, 14 January 2010) and Taggatidis and Others v. Greece (no. 2889/09, 11 October 2011), the applicants requested that the sums awarded to them be paid into a bank account indicated by their representatives owing to the number of applicants and the complexity of the logistical issues involved.
According to the Court's case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, § 141, 4 March 2008).
In any event, this complaint is linked to the one under Article 3 and must therefore, likewise, be declared admissible (see Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, § 116, 4 March 2008).
The Court finds that this evidence is sufficient to prove that there were racial motives behind the police officers" actions (see also Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, §§ 71 and 122, 4 March 2008).
42722/02.
Consideration has been given to the opening of investigations, delays in taking statements and the length of time taken for the preliminary investigation (see Bouyid, cited above, §§ 119-123; Mocanu and Others, cited above, § 322; Identoba and Others, cited above, § 66; Begheluri and Others, cited above, § 99; Denis Vasilyev, cited above, § 100 with further references; and Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, § 67, 4 March 2008).
In such circumstances, the Court considers that the burden of proof lies on the Government (see Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, § 131, 4 March 2008; Sampanis and Others v. Greece, no. 32526/05, §§ 70-71, 5 June 2008; and Makhashevy, cited above, §§ 178-79).
Consideration has been given to the opening of investigations, delays in taking statements and to the length of time taken for the initial investigation (see Denis Vasilyev, cited above, § 100 with further references; and Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, § 67, 4 March 2008).
In the present case, the very fact that the injuries resulted from the use of force by the police is in dispute (compare with Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, §§ 48 and 66, 4 March 2008).
En faisant référence aux arrêts Stoica c. Roumanie (no 42722/02, 4 mars 2008) et Galotskin c. Grèce (no 2945/07, 14 janvier 2010), ils invoquent en ce sens des questions d'ordre logistique relatives à leur nombre.
It is for this reason that the authorities must use all available means to combat racism and racist violence, thereby reinforcing democracy's vision of a society in which diversity is not perceived as a threat but as a source of its enrichment (see Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 145, ECHR 2005-VII; Bekos and Koutropoulos v. Greece, no. 15250/02, § 63, ECHR 2005-XIII (extracts); and Stoica v. Romania, no. 42722/02, § 126, 4 March 2008).
EGMR, 20.03.2012 - 26692/05
C.A.S. AND C.S. v. ROMANIA
EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 74839/10
MUDRIC v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
EGMR, 09.02.2017 - 60042/13
IGBO AND OTHERS v. GREECE
EGMR, 19.01.2017 - 60041/13
SINGH ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE
EGMR, 15.01.2015 - 48352/12
EGMR, 16.07.2013 - 61382/09
BUSUIOC v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
EGMR, 19.04.2018 - 11946/11
EGMR, 20.04.2017 - 23261/13
ZOURNATZIDIS AND OTHERS v. GREECE
EGMR, 28.01.2014 - 26608/11
T.M. AND C.M. v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
EGMR, 17.05.2011 - 35802/05
FRANDES c. ROUMANIE
EGMR, 26.07.2016 - 68066/12
ADAM v. SLOVAKIA
EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 41775/06
SERCAU v. ROMANIA
EGMR, 31.05.2016 - 16270/12
COMORASU c. ROUMANIE
EGMR, 07.04.2016 - 7059/14
ALI CHEEMA ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE
EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 34456/07
CARAIAN v. ROMANIA
EGMR, 10.05.2012 - 27782/10
R.I.P. ET D.L.P. c. ROUMANIE
EGMR, 20.04.2017 - 10244/14
CELA AND OTHERS v. GREECE
EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 59635/13
PIU AND CÎRSTENOIU v. ROMANIA
EGMR, 26.06.2012 - 36680/03
PETREA CHISALAU c. ROUMANIE
EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 33242/05
CIUBOTARU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
EGMR, 05.04.2011 - 28686/04
AKBAR c. ROUMANIE
EGMR, 29.05.2018 - 27810/07
DORNEAN v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 40374/11
EGMR, 05.07.2011 - 18590/08
MARIN c. ROUMANIE
EGMR, 30.09.2014 - 27104/11
NICOLAE v. ROMANIA
EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 21600/05
ROZSA v. ROMANIA