Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ARMELLINI AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1 MRK
  No violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) (englisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ARMELLINI AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  [DEU] No violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ARMELLINI AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA

  Art. 10 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (12)

• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  By reason of the "duties and responsibilities" inherent in the exercise of freedom of expression, the safeguard afforded by Article 10 to journalists in relation to reporting on issues of general interest is subject to the proviso that they are acting in good faith and on an accurate factual basis and providing reliable and precise information in accordance with the ethics of journalism (see Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 54, ECHR 1999-I, and, as a recent authority, Eerikäinen and Others v. Finland, no. 3513/02, § 60, 10 February 2009).
• EGMR, 25.06.1992 - 13778/88

  THORGEIR THORGEIRSON v. ICELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  Were it otherwise, the press would be unable to play its vital role of "public watchdog" (Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom, 26 November 1991, § 59, Series A no. 216; Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 63, Series A no. 239; Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas, cited above, § 62, Gutiérrez Suárez v. Spain, no. 16023/07, § 25, 1 June 2010).
• EGMR, 06.04.2010 - 25576/04

  FLINKKILÄ AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  Although the press must not overstep certain bounds, in particular in respect of the reputation and rights of others or the proper administration of justice, 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 Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas, cited above, § 59, and as a recent authority, Flinkkilä and Others v. Finland, no. 25576/04, § 73, 6 April 2010).

 
• EGMR, 24.08.2004 - 3513/02

  ALEKSEYEV v. ESTONIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  By reason of the "duties and responsibilities" inherent in the exercise of freedom of expression, the safeguard afforded by Article 10 to journalists in relation to reporting on issues of general interest is subject to the proviso that they are acting in good faith and on an accurate factual basis and providing reliable and precise information in accordance with the ethics of journalism (see Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 54, ECHR 1999-I, and, as a recent authority, Eerikäinen and Others v. Finland, no. 3513/02, § 60, 10 February 2009).
• EGMR, 15.11.2012 - 53579/09

  BARGAO ET DOMINGOS CORREIA c. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  While enjoying the protection afforded by the Convention, journalists must, when exercising their duties, abide by the principles of responsible journalism, namely to act in good faith, provide accurate and reliable information, objectively reflect the opinions of those involved in a public debate, and refrain from pure sensationalism (see Novaya Gazeta and Borodyanskiy v. Russia, no. 14087/08, § 37, 28 March 2013 with further references and mutatis mutandis Bargão and Domingos Correia v. Portugal, nos. 53579/09 and 53582/09, § 40, 15 November 2012).
• EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  NOVAYA GAZETA AND BORODYANSKIY v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  While enjoying the protection afforded by the Convention, journalists must, when exercising their duties, abide by the principles of responsible journalism, namely to act in good faith, provide accurate and reliable information, objectively reflect the opinions of those involved in a public debate, and refrain from pure sensationalism (see Novaya Gazeta and Borodyanskiy v. Russia, no. 14087/08, § 37, 28 March 2013 with further references and mutatis mutandis Bargão and Domingos Correia v. Portugal, nos. 53579/09 and 53582/09, § 40, 15 November 2012).
• EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08

  Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  40660/08 and 60641/08, § 106, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  This power of appreciation is not, however, unlimited but goes hand in hand with a European supervision by the Court, whose task it is to give a final ruling on whether a restriction is reconcilable with freedom of expression as protected by Article 10 (see Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 58, ECHR 1999-III).
• EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 15974/90

  PRAGER ET OBERSCHLICK c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  Given that the applicants reported on the matter giving particular details which, for example, concerned the amount of the bribe, the number of football matches manipulated, extensively featuring one particular match, and drew readers" attention to these details, the Court does not find it unreasonable that the Austrian courts considered one statutory declaration signed by the players of the football club and drawn up by the managment of the club as insufficient to give A.T., D.G. and A.I. a reasonable opportunity to comment on the charges (Prager and Oberschlick v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 37, Series A no. 313).
• EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88

  OBSERVER ET GUARDIAN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  Were it otherwise, the press would be unable to play its vital role of "public watchdog" (Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom, 26 November 1991, § 59, Series A no. 216; Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 63, Series A no. 239; Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas, cited above, § 62, Gutiérrez Suárez v. Spain, no. 16023/07, § 25, 1 June 2010).
• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 15890/89

  JERSILD v. DENMARK

• EGMR, 05.09.2023 - 4222/18

  ZÖCHLING v. AUSTRIA

  The applicant lodged an application with the Vienna Regional Criminal Court against the company pursuant to section 6 § 1 of the Media Act (see Armellini and Others v. Austria, no. 14134/07, § 24, 16 April 2015) claiming damages for the publication of insulting statements.