CtEDO 12.03.2019 Auto

CASE OF PETUKHOV v. UKRAINE (No. 2)

RESPONDENT
UKR
HOTĂRÂRE
12.03.2019
Pe scurt
Instanță
CtEDO
Concluzie
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 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading punishment;Inhuman punishment) (Substantive aspect);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
RĂSFOIEȘTE: CtEDO · 2019
DESCARCĂ: PDF · DOCX 🔒 Pro
Citează această cauză
CASE OF PETUKHOV v. UKRAINE (No. 2) (CtEDO, 2019)
HUDOC · oficial

Rezistarea inadmisibilă (Art. 35) Criterii de admisibilitate;(Art. 35-3-a) Pronunțarea articolului 3 - Interzicerea torturii (art. 3 - Tratament degradant;Tratament inhuman) (aspect substantiv);Încălcarea articoluluiui 3 - Interzicerea torturii (art. 3 - Pedeapsa inhumană) (aspect substanțială);Distrugerea pecuniară - atribuire (art. 41 - Prejudiciu material;Darunarea morală); Prejudiciu moral - constatarea încălcării suficiente (art. 41 - Prejudiciu moral;Dar satisfacție); Prejudiciu moral - atribuire (art. 41 - Prejudiciu moral;Dar satisfacție)

§ Cauze similare

Grupate prin similitudine semantică

5 cauze
CtEDO 2019-03-12
0,99
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
CtEDO 2019-03-12
0,98
CASE OF PETUKHOV v. UKRAINE (No. 2) - [Romanian Translation] legal summary by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Moldova
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
CtEDO 2020-01-30
0,97
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 2020-01-30
0,96
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 2020-01-30
0,96
Sukachov c. 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
Sursă