CtEDO 21.01.2021 Auto

CASE OF KADURA AND SMALIY v. UKRAINE

RESPONDENT
UKR
HOTĂRÂRE
21.01.2021
Pe scurt
Instanță
CtEDO
Concluzie
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
RĂSFOIEȘTE: CtEDO · 2021
DESCARCĂ: PDF · DOCX 🔒 Pro
Citează această cauză
CASE OF KADURA AND SMALIY v. UKRAINE (CtEDO, 2021)
HUDOC · oficial

Rezistarea inadmisibilă (Art. 35) Criterii de admisibilitate;(Art. 35-1) Epuizarea căilor interne de recurs; (art. 35-3-a) Pronunțarea articolului 3 - Interzicerea torturii (art. 3 - Investigarea efectivă) (aspect de procedură);Încălcarea articoluluiui 3 - Interzicerea torturii (art. 3 - Tratament degradant) (aspect substantiv);Încălcarea articoluluiui 5 - Dreptul la libertate și securitate (art. 5-3 - Raționalitatea de detenției anterioare);Încălcarea articoluluiui 8 - Dreptul la respectarea vieții private și a vieții familiale (art. 8-1 - Respectul vieții private); Prejudiciu moral - atribuire (art. 41 - Prejudiciu moral;Darcarea)

§ Cauze similare

Grupate prin similitudine semantică

5 cauze
CtEDO 2021-01-21
1,00
CASE OF KADURA AND SMALIY v. UKRAINE - [Ukrainian Translation] by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspec
CtEDO 2022-09-15
0,97
CASE OF VADYM MELNYK v. UKRAINE
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;(Art. 35-4) Rejection of application at any stage of the proceedings;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture
CtEDO 2022-09-15
0,96
CASE OF VADYM MELNYK v. UKRAINE - [Ukrainian Translation] by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;(Art. 35-4) Rejection of application at any stage of the proceedings;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture
CtEDO 2020-01-30
0,96
CASE OF SUKACHOV v. UKRAINE
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment);Violation of Article 13+3 - Right to an effective remedy (Article
CtEDO 2019-03-12
0,96
Petukhov v. Ukraine (no. 2)
Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - P
Sursă