Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  STANKIEWICZ AND OTHERS v. POLAND (No. 2)

  Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 03.11.2015 - 48053/11
• EGMR, 21.09.2016 - 48053/11
• EGMR - 48053/11 (anhängig)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08

  Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.11.2015 - 48053/11

  40660/08 and 60641/08, §§ 109-113, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 39954/08

  Axel Springer AG in Art. 10 EMRK (Freiheit der Meinungsäußerung) verletzt durch …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.11.2015 - 48053/11

  It went on to identify a number of relevant criteria where the right to freedom of expression is being balanced against the right to respect for private life (see Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, §§ 89-95, 7 February 2012 and Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) [GC], nos.
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 15890/89

  JERSILD v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.11.2015 - 48053/11

  Although the press must not overstep certain boundaries, in particular in respect of the reputation and rights of others and the need to prevent the disclosure of confidential information, its duty is nevertheless to impart - in a manner consistent with its obligations and responsibilities - information and ideas on all matters of public interest (see Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298).

 
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.11.2015 - 48053/11

  In sum, the Court's task in exercising its supervisory function is not to take the place of the national authorities, but rather to review under Article 10, in the light of the case as a whole, the decisions they have taken pursuant to their discretionary powers (see, among many other authorities, Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 45, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 15974/90

  PRAGER ET OBERSCHLICK c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.11.2015 - 48053/11

  In addition, the Court is mindful of the fact that journalistic freedom also covers possible recourse to a degree of exaggeration, or even provocation (see Prager and Oberschlick v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 38, Series A no. 313).
• EGMR, 17.07.2001 - 39288/98

  EKIN ASSOCIATION v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.11.2015 - 48053/11

  The Court is therefore empowered to give the final ruling on whether a "restriction" is reconcilable with freedom of expression as protected by Article 10 (see, among many other authorities, Perna v. Italy [GC], no. 48898/99, § 39, ECHR 2003-V, and Association Ekin v. France, no. 39288/98, § 56, ECHR 2001-VIII).