Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  JUCHA AND ZAK v. POLAND

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Jucha and Zak v. Poland

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

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

• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 19127/06

  Were it otherwise, the press would be unable to play its vital role of "public watchdog" (see, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, §§ 59 and 62, ECHR 1999-III, and Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 79, 7 February 2012).
• EGMR, 19.04.2011 - 22385/03

  KASABOVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 19127/06

  The degree of precision for establishing the well-foundedness of a criminal charge by a competent court can hardly be compared to that which ought to be observed by a journalist when expressing his opinion on a matter of public concern, in particular when expressing his opinion in the form of a value judgment (see, Unabhängige Initiative Informationsvielfalt v. Austria, no. 28525/95, § 46, ECHR 2002-I; Scharsach and News Verlagsgesellschaft v. Austria, no. 39394/98, § 43, ECHR 2003-XI; and Kasabova v. Bulgaria, no. 22385/03, § 62, 19 April 2011).
• EGMR, 13.11.2003 - 39394/98

  SCHARSACH ET NEWS VERLAGSGESELLSCHAFT c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 19127/06

  The degree of precision for establishing the well-foundedness of a criminal charge by a competent court can hardly be compared to that which ought to be observed by a journalist when expressing his opinion on a matter of public concern, in particular when expressing his opinion in the form of a value judgment (see, Unabhängige Initiative Informationsvielfalt v. Austria, no. 28525/95, § 46, ECHR 2002-I; Scharsach and News Verlagsgesellschaft v. Austria, no. 39394/98, § 43, ECHR 2003-XI; and Kasabova v. Bulgaria, no. 22385/03, § 62, 19 April 2011).

 
• EGMR, 26.02.2002 - 28525/95

  UNABHÄNGIGE INITIATIVE INFORMATIONSVIELFALT v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 19127/06

  The degree of precision for establishing the well-foundedness of a criminal charge by a competent court can hardly be compared to that which ought to be observed by a journalist when expressing his opinion on a matter of public concern, in particular when expressing his opinion in the form of a value judgment (see, Unabhängige Initiative Informationsvielfalt v. Austria, no. 28525/95, § 46, ECHR 2002-I; Scharsach and News Verlagsgesellschaft v. Austria, no. 39394/98, § 43, ECHR 2003-XI; and Kasabova v. Bulgaria, no. 22385/03, § 62, 19 April 2011).
• EGMR, 17.12.2004 - 33348/96

  CUMPANA AND MAZARE v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 19127/06

  This determination must be based on the following general principles emerging from the Court's case-law (see, among other authorities, CumpÇŽnÇŽ and MazÇŽre v. Romania [GC], no. 33348/96, §§ 88-91, ECHR 2004-XI, with further references):.
• EGMR, 23.05.1991 - 11662/85

  Oberschlick ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 19127/06

  Particularly strong reasons must be provided for any measure affecting this role of the press and limiting access to information which the public has the right to receive (see, Oberschlick v. Austria (no. 1), 23 May 1991, § 58, Series A no. 204).

• EGMR, 04.05.2023 - 52280/16

  WOJTAS v. POLAND

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the freedom of expression and criminal defamation (see, for example, Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC], no. 49017/99, ECHR 2004-XI; Kasabova v. Bulgaria, no. 22385/03, 19 April 2011; Jucha and Zak v. Poland, no. 19127/06, 23 October 2012; and Banaszczyk v. Poland, no. 66299/10, 21 December 2021).