Weitere Entscheidung unten: EKMR, 10.09.1997

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/1999,17115
EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93 (https://dejure.org/1999,17115)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 25.11.1999 - 23118/93 (https://dejure.org/1999,17115)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 25. November 1999 - 23118/93 (https://dejure.org/1999,17115)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1999,17115) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    NILSEN ET JOHNSEN c. NORVEGE

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
    Violation de l'art. 10 Préjudice moral - constat de violation suffisant Dommage matériel - réparation pécuniaire Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure nationale Remboursement frais et dépens - procédure de la Convention (französisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    NILSEN AND JOHNSEN v. NORWAY

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
    Violation of Art. 10 Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient Pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

  • Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte PDF

    (englisch)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (211)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

  • EGMR, 25.06.1992 - 13778/88

    THORGEIR THORGEIRSON v. ICELAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    In 1992, in view of the European Court of Human Rights" Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland judgment of 25 June 1992 (Series A no. 239), the associations withdrew their defamation action against Mr Bratholm.

    While there can be no doubt that any restrictions placed on the right to impart and receive information on arguable allegations of police misconduct call for a strict scrutiny on the part of the Court (see the Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland judgment of 25 June 1992, Series A no. 239, pp. 27-28, §§ 63-70), the same must apply to speech aimed at countering such allegations since it forms part of the same debate.

  • EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88

    OBSERVER ET GUARDIAN c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    The Court finds that some pecuniary loss must have been occasioned by reason of the periods that elapsed from the times when the various costs were incurred until the Court's award (see, for example, the Darby v. Sweden judgment of 23 October 1990, Series A no. 187, p. 14, § 38; the Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom judgment of 26 November 1991, Series A no. 216, p. 38, § 80 (d); and Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas cited above, § 83).
  • EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 18139/91

    TOLSTOY MILOSLAVSKY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    The Court, in accordance with its case-law, will consider whether the costs and expenses claimed were actually and necessarily incurred in order to prevent or obtain redress for the matter found to constitute a violation of the Convention and were reasonable as to quantum (see, for instance, the Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 316-B, p. 83, § 77).
     
  • EGMR, 23.10.1990 - 11581/85

    DARBY v. SWEDEN

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    The Court finds that some pecuniary loss must have been occasioned by reason of the periods that elapsed from the times when the various costs were incurred until the Court's award (see, for example, the Darby v. Sweden judgment of 23 October 1990, Series A no. 187, p. 14, § 38; the Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom judgment of 26 November 1991, Series A no. 216, p. 38, § 80 (d); and Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas cited above, § 83).
  • EGMR, 26.09.1995 - 17851/91

    Radikalenerlaß

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    Indeed, it should be recalled that the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 is one of the principal means of securing effective enjoyment of the right to freedom of assembly and association as enshrined in Article 11 (see Rekvényi v. Hungary [GC], no. 25390/94, § 58, ECHR 1999-III; the United Communist Party of Turkey and Others v. Turkey judgment of 30 January 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I, p. 20, § 42; the Vogt v. Germany judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 323, p. 30, § 64; the Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, pp.
  • EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

    SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    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 the Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1) judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 38, § 62).
  • EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

    BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    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, among many other authorities, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 58, ECHR 1999-III).
  • EGMR, 13.08.1981 - 7601/76

    YOUNG, JAMES ET WEBSTER c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    Indeed, it should be recalled that the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 is one of the principal means of securing effective enjoyment of the right to freedom of assembly and association as enshrined in Article 11 (see Rekvényi v. Hungary [GC], no. 25390/94, § 58, ECHR 1999-III; the United Communist Party of Turkey and Others v. Turkey judgment of 30 January 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I, p. 20, § 42; the Vogt v. Germany judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 323, p. 30, § 64; the Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, pp.
  • EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 25390/94

    REKVÉNYI c. HONGRIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    Indeed, it should be recalled that the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 is one of the principal means of securing effective enjoyment of the right to freedom of assembly and association as enshrined in Article 11 (see Rekvényi v. Hungary [GC], no. 25390/94, § 58, ECHR 1999-III; the United Communist Party of Turkey and Others v. Turkey judgment of 30 January 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I, p. 20, § 42; the Vogt v. Germany judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 323, p. 30, § 64; the Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom judgment of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, pp.
  • EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 26682/95

    SÜREK c. TURQUIE (N° 1)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
    It must be recalled that, according to the Strasbourg Court's case-law, there is little scope under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention for restrictions on political speech or on debate on questions of public interest (see the Wingrove v. the United Kingdom judgment of 25 November 1996, Reports 1996-V, p. 1957, § 58; and Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1)[GC], no. 26682/95, § 61, ECHR 1999-IV).
  • EGMR, 03.05.2001 - 31827/96

    Verstoß gegen die Grundsätze des fairen Verfahrens wegen des Zwangs der Vorlegung …

    In accordance with its case-law, the Court will consider whether the costs and expenses claimed were actually and necessarily incurred in order to prevent or obtain redress for the matter found to constitute a violation of the Convention and were reasonable as to quantum (see, for instance, Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 62, ECHR 1999-VIII).
  • EGMR, 04.12.2003 - 35071/97

    GUNDUZ v. TURKEY

    Celle-ci n'est toutefois pas illimitée mais va de pair avec un contrôle européen exercé par la Cour, qui doit dire en dernier ressort si une restriction se concilie avec la liberté d'expression telle que la protège l'article 10 (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Nilsen et Johnsen c. Norvège [GC], no 23118/93, § 43, CEDH 1999-VIII).

    Enfin, quelle que soit la solution retenue, eu égard à l'ensemble des éléments propres à l'affaire et à la jurisprudence de la Cour (voir, parmi beaucoup d'autres, Nilsen et Johnsen c. Norvège [GC], no 23118/93, § 56, CEDH 1999-VIII ; Skalka c. Pologne, no 43425/98, § 48, 27 mai 2003, et Thoma c. Luxembourg, no 38432/97, § 74, CEDH 2001-III), il est regrettable que la chambre ait décidé d'allouer une somme au requérant au titre du dommage moral, alors qu'elle aurait pu estimer que le simple constat de violation de l'article 10 constituait une satisfaction équitable suffisante.

  • EGMR, 28.06.2001 - 24699/94

    VgT VEREIN GEGEN TIERFABRIKEN c. SUISSE

    Conformément à sa jurisprudence, elle recherchera si les frais et dépens dont le remboursement est réclamé ont été réellement exposés pour prévenir ou redresser la situation jugée constitutive d'une violation de la Convention, s'ils correspondaient à une nécessité et s'ils sont raisonnables quant à leur taux (voir, par exemple, Nilsen et Johnsen c. Norvège [GC], no 23118/93, § 62, CEDH 1999-VIII).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EKMR, 10.09.1997 - 23118/93   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/1997,30746
EKMR, 10.09.1997 - 23118/93 (https://dejure.org/1997,30746)
EKMR, Entscheidung vom 10.09.1997 - 23118/93 (https://dejure.org/1997,30746)
EKMR, Entscheidung vom 10. September 1997 - 23118/93 (https://dejure.org/1997,30746)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1997,30746) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

  • EGMR, 25.06.1992 - 13778/88

    THORGEIR THORGEIRSON v. ICELAND

    Auszug aus EKMR, 10.09.1997 - 23118/93
    The defamation case against professor B was later discontinued in view of the European Court of Human Rights' judgment in the case Thorgeirson vs. Iceland (Series A no. 239).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht