Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 46712/06 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2012,27214) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ZIEMBINSKI v. POLAND
Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1 MRK
No violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 14.02.2008 - 36207/03
RUMYANA IVANOVA v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 46712/06
The Court reiterates that according to its case-law, the more serious an allegation is, the more solid its factual basis should be (see, CumpÇŽnÇŽ and MazÇŽre, cited above, § 101; Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC], no. 49017/99, § 78 in fine, ECHR 2004-XI; Rumyana Ivanova v. Bulgaria, no. 36207/03, § 64, 14 February 2008; Kasabova, cited above, § 65 in fine). - EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93
BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 46712/06
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, 17.12.2004 - 33348/96
CUMPANA AND MAZARE v. ROMANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 46712/06
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, 07.02.2012 - 39954/08
Axel Springer AG in Art. 10 EMRK (Freiheit der Meinungsäußerung) verletzt durch …
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 46712/06
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, 30.03.2004 - 53984/00
RADIO FRANCE ET AUTRES c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 24.07.2012 - 46712/06
While the use of criminal-law sanctions in defamation cases is not in itself disproportionate (see, Radio France and Others v. France, no. 53984/00, § 40, ECHR 2004-II; Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July, cited above, § 59; Dlugolecki v. Poland, no. 23806/03, § 47, 24 February 2009), the nature and severity of the penalties imposed are factors to be taken into account, because they must not be such as to dissuade the press or others who engage in public debate from taking part in the discussion of matters of legitimate public concern (see, CumpÇŽnÇŽ and MazÇŽre, cited above, § 111).