Source: http://echr.ketse.com/doc/64846.01-en-20060615/
Timestamp: 2019-11-21 22:40:09
Document Index: 504971749

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 13', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 8', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 13', '§ 68', '§ 97', '§ 54', '§ 36', '§ 145', '§ 61', '§ 49', '§ 68', '§ 17', '§ 39', '§ 53', '§ 451', '§ 97', '§ 159', '§ 57', '§ 120', '§ 122', '§ 104', '§ 66', '§ 40', '§ 61', '§ 62', '§ 35', '§ 43', '§ 27', '§ 36', '§ 60', '§ 65', '§ 130', '§ 42', '§ 58', '§ 52', '§ 76', '§ 130', '§ 60', '§ 89', '§ 36', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 35', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 8', 'Art. 8', 'art. 6', 'art. 35', 'art. 5', 'art. 5', 'art. 5', 'art. 8', 'art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 5']

MOISEJEVS v. LATVIA / ECHR
MOISEJEVS v. LATVIA View
Date 15/06/2006
AppNr 64846/01
Articles 13; 3; 34; 35-1; 5-1; 5-3; 6-1; 8
Violated / NonViolated 35-15-36-18133434
Citations 35-15-1-c5-35-45-56-16-26-3-c8135-15-1-c5-26-16-3-a834
Not necessary to examine Art. 13+34
Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion of domestic proceedings)
Violation of Art. 13+8
Violation of Art. 34
Application Number 64846/01
Date of Introduction 13/11/2000
Date of Judgment 15/06/2006
Conclusion Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion of domestic proceedings) ; Violation of Art. 3 ; Violation of Art. 5-1 ; Violation of Art. 5-3 ; Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Violation of Art. 8 ; Violation of Art. 13+8 ; Violation of Art. 34 ; No violation of Art. 34 ; Not necessary to examine Art. 13+34
Articles 3 ; 5-1 ; 5-3 ; 6-1 ; 8 ; 13 ; 34 ; 35-1
Strasbourg Case Law Akdivar and Others v. Turkey, judgment of 16 September 1996, Reports 1996-IV, p. 1211, § 68 ; Aksoy v. Turkey, judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports 1996-VI, p. 2286, § 97 ; Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, §§ 54-57, ECHR 2000-III ; Butkevicius v. Lithuania, no. 48297/99, §§ 36-39, ECHR 2002-II ; Chahal v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 15 November 1996, Reports 1996-V, pp. 1869-1870, § 145 ; Cotlet v. Romania, no. 38565/97, §§ 61, 65 and 71, 3 June 2003 ; Farbtuhs v. Latvia, no. 4672/02, §§ 49-54, 2 December 2004 ; Freimanis and Lidums v. Latvia, nos 73443/01 and 74860/01, §§ 68, 106 and 125, 9 February 2006 ; G. v. Italy, judgment of 27 February 1992, Series A, no. 228-F, p. 68, § 17 ; Gaillard v. France (dec.), no. 47337/99, 11 July 2000 ; Grauslys v. Lithuania, no. 36743/97, §§ 39-41, 10 October 2000 ; Hartman v. the Czech Republic, no. 53341/99, §§ 53-54, ECHR 2003-VIII ; Ilascu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 48787/99, § 451, ECHR 2004-VII ; Ilhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, § 97, ECHR 2000-VII ; Ireland v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A no. 25, p. 64, § 159 ; Jecius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 57-59, ECHR 2000-IX ; Kalashnikov v. Russia, no. 47095/99, § 120, ECHR 2002-VI ; Klyakhin v. Russia, no. 46082/99, § 122, 30 November 2004 ; Kornakovs v. Latvia (dec.), no. 61005/00, 21 October 2004 ; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 104 and 157, ECHR 2000-XI ; Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, §§ 66, 70-71, 73, 86, 87, 100-103, 140-142, 28 November 2002 ; Lukanov v. Bulgaria, judgment of 20 March 1997, Reports 1997 II, p. 543, § 40 ; Messina v. Italy (no 2), no. 25498/94, § 61 and §§ 62-63, ECHR 2000-X ; Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, ECHR 2002-VIII ; Muller v. France, judgment of 17 March 1997, Reports 1997-II, p. 388, § 35 ; Petra v. Romania, judgment of 23 September 1998, Reports 1998-VII, pp. 2854-2855, § 43 ; Poleshchuk v. Russia, no. 60776/00, §§ 27-28, 7 October 2004 ; Prodan v. Moldova, no. 49806/99, § 36, ECHR 2004-III ; Rokhlina v. Russia, no. 54071/00, § 60 and § 65, 7 April 2005 ; Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 130, ECHR 2000-VII ; Schemkamper v. France, no. 75833/01, § 42, 18 October 2005 ; Slavgorodski v. Estonia (dec.), no. 37043/97, ECHR 1999-II ; Stašaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, §§ 58-61, 21 March 2002 ; Sulaoja v. Estonia, no. 55939/00, § 52, 15 February 2005 ; Tanrikulu v. Turkey [GC], no. 23763/94, § 76 and § 130, ECHR 1999-IV ; Wiesinger v. Austria, judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A, no. 213, p. 22, § 60 ; Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, §§ 89-93, ECHR 2000-XI ; X, Y and Z v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 22 April 1997, Reports 1997-II, pp. 629-630, § 36
Keywords "(Art. 13) EFFECTIVE REMEDY" "(Art. 3) DEGRADING TREATMENT" "(Art. 34) HINDER THE EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT OF PETITION" "(Art. 35-1) EXHAUSTION OF DOMESTIC REMEDIES" "(Art. 5-1) LAWFUL ARREST OR DETENTION" "(Art. 5-1) PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED BY LAW" "(Art. 5-3) LENGTH OF PRE-TRIAL DETENTION" "(Art. 5-3) REASONABLENESS OF PRE-TRIAL DETENTION" "(Art. 6) CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS" "(Art. 6-1) REASONABLE TIME" "(Art. 8-1) RESPECT FOR FAMILY LIFE" "(Art. 8-2) NECESSARY IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY"
FREIMANIS AND LIDUMS v. LATVIA
5-3, 5-4, 6-1, 6-2 Court (Third Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
SCHEMKAMPER v. FRANCE
13, 8 Court (Second Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
5-3, 5-4, 6-1, 6, 13, 8, 34, 13, 8 Court (Second Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
POLESHCHUK v. RUSSIA
34 Court (First Section) Judgment (Merits)
GRISANKOVA and GRISANKOVS v. LATVIA
GAILLARD contre la FRANCE
SLAVGORODSKI v. ESTONIA
7 (art. 6) criminal proceedings
4 (art. 35-1) exhaustion of domestic remedies
4 (art. 5-3) reasonableness of pre-trial detention
2 (art. 5-3) judge or other officer exercising judicial power
2 (art. 5-1) procedure prescribed by law
2 (art. 8-1) respect for correspondence
1 (art. 5-2) information on reasons for arrest
16 5-3
10 37-1
4 35-1
2 P7-2
2 P7-3
9 Partly inadmissible
9 Partly struck out of the list
3 Violation of Art. 5-4
1 No violation of Art. 6-3-a
1 No violation of Art. 5-2
POZNAKOVS v. LATVIA
Court (Third Section Com… Decision
DMITRIJEVS c. LETTONIE
PETROVS v. LATVIA
PANASENKOVS v. LATVIA
KEIPENVARDECAS v. LATVIA
APARS v. LATVIA