Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BLAJA NEWS SP. Z O.O. v. POLAND
Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2 MRK
No violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) (englisch)
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Blaja News Sp. z o. o. v. Poland
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
BLAJA NEWS SP. Z O.O. v. POLAND
Wird zitiert von ... (2) Neu Zitiert selbst (16)
- EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 15974/90
PRAGER ET OBERSCHLICK c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
These principles were equally applicable to situations where the administration of justice or judges or prosecutors were criticised by the press (citing Barfod v. Denmark, 22 February 1989, Series A no. 149; Prager and Oberschlick v. Austria, 26 April 1995, Series A no. 313; and Lesník v. Slovakia, no. 35640/97, ECHR 2003-IV).The applicant company reiterated that the freedom of the press was strongly protected under Article 10 of the Convention; the press could have recourse to a degree of exaggeration or even provocation (it cited Prager and Oberschlick v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 38, Series A no. 313).
- EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08
Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie …
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
This power of appreciation is not, however, unlimited but goes hand in hand with 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. 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 power of appreciation (see, among many other authorities, Fressoz and Roire, cited above, § 45; Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 86; 7 February 2012; Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) [GC], nos, 40660/08 and 60641/08, § 105, ECHR 2012 ). - EGMR, 16.06.2005 - 55120/00
INDEPENDENT NEWS AND MEDIA AND INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS IRELAND LIMITED v. IRELAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
Furthermore, the Court reiterates that in specific circumstances an exceptional and particularly high amount of damages for libel (see Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, 13 July 1995, § 51, Series A no. 316-B, and Independent News and Media and Independent Newspapers Ireland Limited v. Ireland, no. 55120/00, § 115, ECHR 2005-V (extracts)), may raise an issue under Article 10 of the Convention.
- EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 39954/08
Axel Springer AG in Art. 10 EMRK (Freiheit der Meinungsäußerung) verletzt durch …
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
This power of appreciation is not, however, unlimited but goes hand in hand with 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. 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 power of appreciation (see, among many other authorities, Fressoz and Roire, cited above, § 45; Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 86; 7 February 2012; Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) [GC], nos, 40660/08 and 60641/08, § 105, ECHR 2012 ). - EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74
SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
The test of necessity in a democratic society" requires the Court to determine whether the interference complained of corresponded to a pressing social need, whether it was proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued, and whether the reasons given by the national authorities to justify it are relevant and sufficient (see, among many other authorities, The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, § 62, Series A no. 30, and Skalka v. Poland, no. 43425/98, § 35, 27 May 2003). - EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 18139/91
TOLSTOY MILOSLAVSKY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
Furthermore, the Court reiterates that in specific circumstances an exceptional and particularly high amount of damages for libel (see Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, 13 July 1995, § 51, Series A no. 316-B, and Independent News and Media and Independent Newspapers Ireland Limited v. Ireland, no. 55120/00, § 115, ECHR 2005-V (extracts)), may raise an issue under Article 10 of the Convention. - EGMR, 21.06.2011 - 35105/04
KANIA AND KITTEL v. POLAND
- EGMR, 17.12.2004 - 33348/96
CUMPANA AND MAZARE v. ROMANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
Journalists making allegations about individuals were obliged to show that there was sufficient factual basis for their assertions (here it referred to CumpÇŽnÇŽ and MazÇŽre v. Romania [GC], no. 33348/96, ECHR 2004-XI). - EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 29032/95
FELDEK c. SLOVAQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
Where a statement amounts to a value judgment, the proportionality of the interference may depend on whether or not there exists a sufficient factual basis for the impugned statement, since even a value judgment may be excessive if it has no factual basis to support it (see De Haes and Gijsels, cited above, § 47, and Feldek v. Slovakia, no. 29032/95, § 76, ECHR 2001-VIII). - EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02
LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 59545/10
21279/02 and 36448/02, § 67, ECHR 2007-IV; and Kania and Kittel v. Poland, no. 35105/04, § 36, 21 June 2011). - EGMR, 07.05.2002 - 46311/99
McVICAR v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93
BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE
- EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95
FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE
- EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88
OBSERVER ET GUARDIAN c. ROYAUME-UNI
- EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 15890/89
JERSILD v. DENMARK
- EGMR, 22.02.1989 - 11508/85
BARFOD c. DANEMARK
- Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 08.02.2024 - C-633/22
Real Madrid Club de Fútbol - Vorlage zur Vorabentscheidung - Justizielle …
10 EGMR, 26. November 2013, B?‚aja News Sp. z o.o./Polen (CE:ECHR:2013:1126JUD005954510, § 71).114 EGMR, 26. November 2013, B?‚aja News Sp. z o.o./Polen (CE:ECHR:2013:1126JUD005954510, § 71).
132 Vgl. EGMR, 2. Juni 2008, Timpul Info-Magazin und Anghel/Moldau (CE:ECHR:2007:1127JUD004286405, § 39), sowie EGMR, 26. November 2013, B?‚aja News Sp. z o.o./Polen (CE:ECHR:2013:1126JUD005954510, § 71).
- EGMR, 27.05.2014 - 346/04
MUSTAFA ERDOGAN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY
The Court has stated on many occasions that issues concerning the functioning of the justice system constitute questions of public interest, the debate on which enjoys the protection of Article 10 (see, for example, Blaja News Sp. z o. o. v. Poland, no. 59545/10, § 60, 26 November 2013, and Prager and Oberschlick v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 34, Series A no. 313).