CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 2 avril 2019
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-192887
- Date
- 2 avril 2019
- Publication
- 2 avril 2019
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleCommunicated
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }   Communicated on 2 April 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 33567/15 Petru JESTCOV against the Republic of Moldova and Russia lodged on 30 June 2015 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the killing of the applicant’s wife by a Russian national who resides in the Transdniestrian region of Moldova. The applicant complains under Article 2 of the Convention that after the conviction of his wife’s killer by the Moldovan courts, the Moldovan authorities were unable to enforce the sentence due to the fact that the former fled to Transdniestria. He alleges that Russia and Moldova are responsible for his wife’s killer’s impunity. QUESTIONs tO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicant come within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Moldova and/or the Russian Federation within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention as interpreted by the Court, inter alia , in the cases of Ilaşcu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 48787/99, ECHR 2004-VII, and Catan and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], nos. 43370/04 and   2   others, §§ 102-23, ECHR 2012 (extracts), on account of the circumstances of the present case?   2.     Has the applicant’s wife’s right to life, ensured by Article   2 of the Convention, been violated in the present case (see Güzelyurtlu and Others v.   Cyprus and Turkey [GC], 36925/07, 29 January 2019)?Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 2 avril 2019
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-192887
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel