Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  RANTSEV c. CHYPRE ET RUSSIE [Extraits]

  Art. 1, Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 4, Art. 4 Abs. 1, Art. 4 Abs. 2, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
  Demande de radiation rejetée Exception préliminaire rejetée (ratione loci) Exception préliminaire jointe au fond (ratione materiae) Exception préliminaire rejetée (ratione materiae) Non-violation de l'art. 2 par Chypre (volet matériel) Violation de l'art. 2 par ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  RANTSEV v. CYPRUS AND RUSSIA

  Art. 1, Art. 2, Art. 2 Abs. 1, Art. 4, Art. 4 Abs. 1, Art. 4 Abs. 2, Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
  Request for strike out rejected Preliminary objection dismissed (ratione loci) Preliminary objection joined to the merits (ratione materiae) Preliminary objection dismissed (ratione materiae) No violation of Art. 2 by Cyprus (substantive aspect) Violation of Art. 2 ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  RANTSEV v. CYPRUS AND RUSSIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] by the Austrian Institute for Human Rights (ÖIM)

  [DEU] Request for strike out rejected;Preliminary objection dismissed (ratione loci);Preliminary objection joined to the merits (ratione materiae);Preliminary objection dismissed (ratione materiae);No violation of Art. 2 by Cyprus (substantive aspect);Violation of Art. ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse (3)

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
• institut-fuer-menschenrechte.de (Kurzinformation)

  Fall Rantsev ./. Cyprus and Russia

• institut-fuer-menschenrechte.de (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

  Rantsev gegen Zypern und Russland

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04
• EGMR, 10.03.2017 - 25965/04

Papierfundstellen

• NJW 2010, 3003

Wird zitiert von ... (9)Neu Zitiert selbst (30)

• EGMR, 23.11.1983 - 8919/80

  VAN DER MUSSELE c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  Although Ms Rantseva had entered Cyprus voluntarily to work in the cabaret, the Court had established that prior consent, without more, does not negate a finding of compulsory labour (referring to Van der Mussele v. Belgium, 23 November 1983, § 36, Series A no. 70).

  For "forced or compulsory labour" to arise, the Court has held that there must be some physical or mental constraint, as well as some overriding of the person's will (Van der Mussele v. Belgium, 23 November 1983, § 34, Series A no. 70; Siliadin, cited above, § 117).

• EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7367/76

  GUZZARDI v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  Finally, the Court reiterates that its judgments serve not only to decide those cases brought before it but, more generally, to elucidate, safeguard and develop the rules instituted by the Convention, thereby contributing to the observance by the States of the engagements undertaken by them as Contracting Parties (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 154, Series A no. 25; Guzzardi v. Italy, 6 November 1980, § 86, Series A no. 39; and Karner v. Austria, no. 40016/98, § 26, ECHR 2003-IX).

  The difference between restrictions on movement serious enough to fall within the ambit of a deprivation of liberty under Article 5 § 1 and mere restrictions of liberty which are subject only to Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 is one of degree or intensity, and not one of nature or substance (Guzzardi v. Italy, 6 November 1980, § 93, Series A no. 39).

• EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 14038/88

  Jens Söring

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  Finally, the Court emphasises that the object and purpose of the Convention, as an instrument for the protection of individual human beings, requires that its provisions be interpreted and applied so as to make its safeguards practical and effective (see, inter alia, Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 87, Series A no. 161; and Artico v. Italy, 13 May 1980, § 33, Series A no. 37).

 
• EGMR, 12.11.2008 - 34503/97

  Demir und Baykara ./. Türkei - Streikrecht für Beamte

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  The Court has never considered the provisions of the Convention as the sole framework of reference for the interpretation of the rights and freedoms enshrined therein (Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no. 34503/97, § 67, 12 November 2008).
• EGMR, 12.12.2001 - 52207/99

  V. und B. B., Ž. S., M. S., D. J. und D. S. gegen Belgien, Dänemark, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  Article 1 of the Convention must be considered to reflect this ordinary and essentially territorial notion of jurisdiction (see Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and 16 Other Contracting States (dec.) [GC], no. 52207/99, §§ 59-61, ECHR 2001-XII).
• EGMR, 11.07.2002 - 28957/95

  Christine Goodwin ./. Vereinigtes Königreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  The increasingly high standards required in the area of the protection of human rights and fundamental liberties correspondingly and inevitably require greater firmness in assessing breaches of the fundamental values of democratic societies (see, among many other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 101, ECHR 1999-V; Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 28957/95, § 71, ECHR 2002-VI; and Siliadin, cited above, § 121).
• EGMR, 27.09.1995 - 18984/91

  McCANN AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  As the Court has consistently held, the obligation to protect the right to life under Article 2 of the Convention, read in conjunction with the State's general duty under Article 1 of the Convention to "secure to everyone within [its] jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in [the] Convention", requires that there should be some form of effective official investigation when individuals have been killed as a result of the use of force (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, § 161, Series A no. 324; Kaya v. Turkey, 19 February 1998, § 86, Reports 1998-I; Medova v. Russia, cited above, § 103).
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  Under that Convention, the Court is required to ascertain the ordinary meaning to be given to the words in their context and in the light of the object and purpose of the provision from which they are drawn (see Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 29, Series A no. 18; Loizidou, cited above, § 43; and Article 31 § 1 of the Vienna Convention).
• EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 61603/00

  Konventionskonforme Auslegung des deutschen (Zivil-)Rechts …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  It is reasonable to assume that had she been a guest in the apartment and was free to leave at any time, she would simply have left via the front door (see Storck v. Germany, no. 61603/00, §§ 76-78, ECHR 2005-V).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.01.2010 - 25965/04

  The increasingly high standards required in the area of the protection of human rights and fundamental liberties correspondingly and inevitably require greater firmness in assessing breaches of the fundamental values of democratic societies (see, among many other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 101, ECHR 1999-V; Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 28957/95, § 71, ECHR 2002-VI; and Siliadin, cited above, § 121).
• EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 29392/95

  Z ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 13.05.1980 - 6694/74

  ARTICO c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 12.04.2006 - 65731/01

  STEC ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 32967/96

  CALVELLI ET CIGLIO c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 14.03.2002 - 46477/99

  PAUL ET AUDREY EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 22277/93

  ILHAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23657/94

  ÇAKICI v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 12.02.2004 - 47287/99

  PEREZ c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 28.03.2000 - 22535/93

  MAHMUT KAYA v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 24746/94

  HUGH JORDAN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 06.07.2005 - 43579/98
• EGMR, 06.05.2003 - 47916/99

  MENSON contre le ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 04.05.2001 - 30054/96

  KELLY AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
• EGMR, 24.04.2003 - 24351/94

  AKTAS v. TURKEY
• EGMR, 14.10.1999 - 37680/97

  RIERA BLUME AND OTHERS v. SPAIN
• EGMR, 11.05.1999 - 40753/98

  RAMPOGNA ET MURGIA contre l'ITALIE
• EGMR, 05.12.2013 - 72001/01

  ATANASOVA ET 2 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA BULGARIE
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 40016/98

  KARNER c. AUTRICHE
• EGMR, 24.11.2005 - 49429/99

  CAPITAL BANK AD v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 20.10.2009 - 858/08

  RADOSZEWSKA-ZAKOSCIELNA v. POLAND

• EGMR, 12.11.2013 - 5786/08

  Gesetzeslücke: Menschenrechtsgerichtshof verurteilt Schweden wegen Nacktaufnahmen

  Rantsev c. Chypre et Russie, no 25965/04, §§ 284 et 288, CEDH 2010.
• EGMR, 07.07.2011 - 37452/02

  STUMMER c. AUTRICHE

  Son premier paragraphe ne prévoit pas de restrictions, en quoi il contraste avec la majorité des clauses normatives de la Convention et des Protocoles nos 1 et 4, et d'après l'article 15 § 2 il ne souffre nulle dérogation, même en cas de guerre ou d'autre danger public menaçant la vie de la nation (voir Siliadin c. France, no 73316/01, § 112, CEDH 2005-VII, et Rantsev c. Chypre et Russie, no 25965/04, § 283, CEDH 2010-...).
• EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 58216/12

  Ausreichende Untersuchung von Anschuldigungen von Menschenhandel

  [119] Rantsev v Cyprus and Russia, no. 25965/04, ECHR 2010 (extracts).

 
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 16.07.2015 - C-340/14

  Trijber - Richtlinie 2006/123/EG - Art. 2 Abs. 2 Buchst. d - Begriff der …

  48 - Vgl. Urteil vom 7. Januar 2010, Rantsev/Zypern und Russland, Beschwerde-Nr. 25965/04, Rn. 282. Art. 4 EMRK findet seine funktionale Entsprechung in Art. 5 Abs. 1 und 2 der Charta.
• EGMR, 09.02.2016 - 10109/14

  MEIER c. SUISSE

  Son premier paragraphe ne prévoit pas de restrictions, ce en quoi il contraste avec la majorité des clauses normatives de la Convention et des Protocoles nos 1 et 4, et d'après l'article 15 § 2 il ne souffre nulle dérogation, même en cas de danger public menaçant la vie de la nation (Siliadin c. France, no 73316/01, § 112, CEDH 2005-VII, et Rantsev c. Chypre et Russie, no 25965/04, § 283, CEDH 2010).
• VG Würzburg, 14.04.2021 - W 10 K 19.32043

  Erfolglose Asylklage wegen unauflösbar widersprüchlichen Vortrags

  Das Gericht verkennt dabei nicht das grundsätzliche Problem des Menschenhandels zur sexuellen Ausbeutung von Frauen nach Europa, auf das auch die Klägerbevollmächtigte unter Verweis auf verschiedene Urteile und Normen (VG Stuttgart, U.v. 4.4.2016 - A 7 K 3376/14; U.v. 27.9.2019 - A 7 K 2540/17; VG Magdeburg, U.v. 28.1.2020 - 6 A 40/19 MD; EGMR, U.v. 7.10.2010 - Ransev/Zypern und Russland, Nr. 25965/04; Erwägungsgrund 1 der RL 2011/36/EU; Art. 5 Abs. 3 EU-Grundrechtecharta) hinweist.
• VG Ansbach, 29.01.2020 - AN 17 S 19.51111

  Dublin-Verfahren (Portugal)

  Insbesondere hat der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte die konventionsrechtliche Bewertung des Tatbestandes des Menschenhandels in das Normengefüge der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention (EMRK) mit seiner Entscheidung vom 7. Januar 2010 (Az. 25965/04 Rantsev/Zypern u. Russland - NJW 2010, 3003) weitergehend beleuchtet und hieraus bestimmte Verhaltensgebote an die Konventionsstaaten im Zusammenhang mit der Bekämpfung des Menschenhandels und der Verbesserung der Lage der Opfer von Menschenhandel formuliert.
• EGMR, 31.05.2016 - 11167/12

  BAKANOVA v. LITHUANIA

  The Court therefore considers that the special features of this case do not absolve Lithuania from an obligation to carry out an effective investigation (see Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, no. 25965/04, §§ 243-247, ECHR 2010 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 06.02.2018 - 7442/08

  ADIGÜZEL c. TURQUIE

  La Cour renvoie à sa jurisprudence pertinente en matière de l'article 4 de la Convention (Van der Mussele, précité, §§ 32, 34 et 38, Karlheinz Schmidt, précité, Siliadin c. France, no 73316/01, §§ 112, 115 et 116, CEDH 2005VII, Zarb Adami, précité, § 44, Rantsev c. Chypre et Russie, no 25965/04, § 283, CEDH 2010 (extraits), Steindel c. Allemagne (déc.), no 29878/07, 14 septembre 2010, Stummer c. Autriche [GC], no 37452/02, §§ 116 à 118 et 120, CEDH 2011, Mihal c. Slovaquie (déc.), no 31303/08, § 64, 28 juin 2011, Bucha c. Slovaquie (déc.), no 43259/07, § 39, 20 septembre 2011, Graziani-Weiss c. Autriche, no 31950/06, §§ 36 à 38, 18 octobre 2011, et Chitos c. Grèce, no 51637/12, § 79, CEDH 2015 (extraits)).