Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KRONE VERLAG GmbH & Co. KG (N° 3) c. AUTRICHE

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation de l'art. 10 Dommage matériel - réparation pécuniaire Frais et dépens (procédure nationale) - demande rejetée Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure de la Convention ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KRONE VERLAG GmbH & Co. KG (No. 3) v. AUSTRIA

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 10 Pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) - claim dismissed Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings ...

• Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte

  (englisch)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 20.03.2003 - 39069/97
• EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

  The Court will consider the above claims in the light of the criteria laid down in its case-law, namely, whether the costs and expenses were actually and necessarily incurred in order to prevent or obtain redress for the matter found to constitute a violation of the Convention and are reasonable as to quantum (see, for instance, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 80, ECHR 1999-III).
• EGMR, 24.02.1994 - 15450/89

  CASADO COCA v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

  The Court's task is therefore confined to ascertaining whether the measures taken at national level are justifiable in principle and proportionate (see Casado Coca v. Spain, judgment of 24 February 1994, Series A no. 285-A, p. 28, § 50, and Jacubowski v. Germany, judgment of 23 June 1994, Series A no. 291-A, p.14, § 26).
• EGMR, 23.06.1994 - 15088/89

  JACUBOWSKI v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

  The Court's task is therefore confined to ascertaining whether the measures taken at national level are justifiable in principle and proportionate (see Casado Coca v. Spain, judgment of 24 February 1994, Series A no. 285-A, p. 28, § 50, and Jacubowski v. Germany, judgment of 23 June 1994, Series A no. 291-A, p.14, § 26).

 
• EGMR, 11.01.2000 - 31457/96

  NEWS VERLAGS GmbH & Co. KG v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

  The Court considers that the interference was prescribed by law, namely by sections 1 and 2 of the Unfair Competition Act (see markt intern Verlag GmbH and Klaus Beermann v. Germany, judgment of 20 November 1989, Series A no. 165, pp. 18-19, § 30, with further references, and, mutatis mutandis, News Verlags GmbH & Co. KG v. Austria, no. 31457/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-I).
• EGMR, 26.02.2002 - 28525/95

  UNABHÄNGIGE INITIATIVE INFORMATIONSVIELFALT v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

  However, the Court notes firstly that only one of the three branches of the injunction is at issue (see paragraph 19 above), while the sums claimed by the applicant company relate to the domestic proceedings in their entirety (see Unabhängige Initiative Informationsvielfalt v. Austria, no. 28525/95, § 54, 26 February 2002).
• EGMR, 26.02.2002 - 29271/95

  DICHAND AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

  The Court finds that some pecuniary loss must have been occasioned by reason of the period that elapsed between the time when the above costs were incurred and the Court's award (see Dichand and Others v. Austria, no. 29271/95, § 62, 26 February 2002).
• EGMR, 12.04.2001 - 43524/98

  SCHWEIZERISCHE RADIO- und FERNSEHGESELLSCHAFT (SRG) v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

  In so far as this part of the injunction is concerned, the Court finds, and this was common ground between the parties, that it constituted an interference with the applicant company's right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by Article 10 § 1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Hertel v. Switzerland, judgment of 25 August 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VI, pp. 2324-25, § 31; and Schweizerische Radio- und Fernsehgesellschaft (SRG) v Switzerland (dec.), no. 43524/98, 12 April 2001).
• EGMR, 20.11.1989 - 10572/83

  MARKT INTERN VERLAG GMBH ET KLAUS BEERMANN c. ALLEMAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2003 - 39069/97

  The Court considers that the interference was prescribed by law, namely by sections 1 and 2 of the Unfair Competition Act (see markt intern Verlag GmbH and Klaus Beermann v. Germany, judgment of 20 November 1989, Series A no. 165, pp. 18-19, § 30, with further references, and, mutatis mutandis, News Verlags GmbH & Co. KG v. Austria, no. 31457/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-I).

• OLG Hamburg, 30.06.2009 - 3 U 13/09

  EU-Heilmittelwerberecht: Werbung für ein Läusemittel mit dem Testergebnis der …

  Kommerzielle Werbung darf nach der Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte (EGMR) nach Art. 10 EMRK eingeschränkt werden, wenn die Einschränkung unlauteren Wettbewerb verhindert, unwahr oder irreführend ist oder die Rechte Dritter schützt oder die spezifischen Umstände bestimmter gewerblicher Tätigkeitsfelder dies verlangen, wobei allerdings die Umstände des Einzelfalls unter Beachtung der Bedeutung des Rechts auf Meinungsäußerungsfreiheit abzuwägen sind (siehe nur Urteil v. 11.12.2003, Az. 39069/97, Tz. 31 - KRONE VERLAG GmbH & Co. KG v. AUSTRIA; Urteil v. 24.2..1994, Az. 15450/89, Tz. 50 - CASADO COCA v. SPAIN).
• EGMR, 16.02.2016 - 8895/10

  ÄRZTEKAMMER FÜR WIEN AND DORNER v. AUSTRIA

  The Court reiterates that, in the past, it has held that section 1 of the Unfair Competition Act - which prohibits unfair commercial practice or any other unfair action which might affect the competitive capability of a business in a significant way for competitive purposes - was sufficiently precise for the purpose of Article 10 of the Convention and, accordingly, that an interference based on that provision was prescribed by law within the meaning of Article 10 (see, Krone Verlag GmbH & Co. KG v. Austria (no. 3), no. 39069/97, § 24, ECHR 2003-XII).
• EGMR, 06.04.2021 - 10783/14

  HANDZHIYSKI v. BULGARIA

  It can also be accepted that the applicant suffered some further pecuniary loss as a result of the lapse of time since the time when he paid the fine - 20 January 2014 (see paragraph 20 above, and compare with Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 83, ECHR 1999-III; Unabhängige Initiative Informationsvielfalt v. Austria, no. 28525/95, § 58, ECHR 2002-I; Krone Verlag GmbH & Co. KG v. Austria (no. 3), no. 39069/97, § 47, ECHR 2003-XII; Albert-Engelmann-Gesellschaft mbH v. Austria, no. 46389/99, § 39, 19 January 2006; and Arbeiter v. Austria, no. 3138/04, § 32, 25 January 2007).