Source: http://echr.ketse.com/doc/44587.98-en-20080624/
Timestamp: 2020-05-27 00:43:22
Document Index: 542008561

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 2', 'Art. 2', '§ 68', '§ 211', '§ 283', '§ 117', '§ 49', '§ 127', '§ 89', '§ 73', '§ 89', '§ 81', '§ 115', '§ 26', '§ 63', '§ 146', '§ 161', '§ 87', '§ 119', '§ 36', '§ 106', '§ 146', '§ 135', '§ 88', '§ 115', '§ 32', '§106', '§ 111', '§ 109', '§ 95', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 35', 'Art. 35']

ISAAK v. TURKEY / ECHR
ISAAK v. TURKEY View
Articles 2; 35-1; 41
Represented by CANDOUNAS C. ; ANGELIDES P. ; PAPACHARALAMBOUS A.
Date of Judgment 24/06/2008
Conclusion Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) ; Violation of Art. 2 (substantive aspect) ; Violation of Art. 2 (procedural aspect) ; Pecuniary damage - award ; Non-pecuniary damage - award
Articles 2 , 35-1 , 41
Strasbourg Case Law Akdivar and Others v. Turkey, judgment of 16 September 1996, Reports 1996-IV, § 68 ; Akkum and Others v. Turkey, no. 21894/93, § 211, ECHR 2005-II (extracts) ; Avsar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, §§ 283, 391, ECHR 2001-VII (extracts) ; Bazorkina v. Russia, no. 69481/01, §§ 117, 119, 27 July 2006 ; Belziuk v. Poland, judgment of 25 March 1998, Reports 1998-II, § 49 ; Çakici v. Turkey [GC], no. 23657/94, § 127, ECHR 1999-IV ; Cyprus v. Turkey [GC], no. 25781/94, §§ 89-102, ECHR 2001-IV ; Estamirov and Others v. Russia, no. 60272/00, §§ 73-74, 77, 12 October 2006 ; Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, § 89, 14 December 2000 ; Güleç v. Turkey, judgment of 27 July 1998, Reports 1998-IV, §§ 81-82 ; Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, §§ 115 and 141, ECHR 2001-III (extracts) ; Ilascu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 48787/99, § 26, ECHR 2004-VII ; Ilhan v. Turkey [GC] no. 22277/93, § 63, ECHR 2000-VII ; Imakayeva v. Russia, no. 7615/02, §§ 146-148, ECHR 2006-... (extracts) ; Ireland v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A no. 25, § 161 ; Kakoulli v. Turkey, no. 38595/97, 22 November 2005 ; Kaya v. Turkey, judgment of 19 February 1998, Reports 1998-I, §§ 87, 105 ; Khashiyev and Akayeva v. Russia, nos. 57942/00 and 57945/00, §§ 119-121, 24 February 2005 ; L.C.B. v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 9 June 1998, Reports 1998-III, § 36 ; Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no. 22535/93, §§ 106-107, ECHR 2000-III ; McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324, §§ 146-147, 161 ; McKerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 28883/95, 4 April 2000 ; Musayev and Others v. Russia, nos. 57941/00, 58699/00 and 60403/00, §§ 135, 142, 144, 189, 193, 26 July 2007 ; Ogur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, §§ 88, 91-92, ECHR 1999-III ; Osman v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 8 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, § 115 ; Ribitsch v. Austria, judgment of 4 December 1995, Series A no. 336, § 32 ; Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, §106, ECHR 2000-VII ; Tanli v. Turkey, no. 26129/95, § 111, ECHR 2001-III (extracts) ; Tanrikulu v. Turkey [GC], no. 23763/94, § 109, ECHR 1999-IV ; Togcu v. Turkey, no. 27601/95, § 95, 31 May 2005
Keywords "(Art. 2-1) LIFE" "(Art. 2-2) ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY" "(Art. 2-2) QUELL RIOT OR INSURRECTION" "(Art. 2-2) USE OF FORCE" "(Art. 35-1) EFFECTIVE DOMESTIC REMEDY" "(Art. 35-1) EXHAUSTION OF DOMESTIC REMEDIES" "POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS"
2, 14, 2, 8 Court (Fourth Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)