Weitere Entscheidung unten: EGMR, 23.04.2002

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 20.04.2004 - 60115/00   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2004,28203
EGMR, 20.04.2004 - 60115/00 (https://dejure.org/2004,28203)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 20.04.2004 - 60115/00 (https://dejure.org/2004,28203)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 20. April 2004 - 60115/00 (https://dejure.org/2004,28203)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2004,28203) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (4)

  • HRR Strafrecht

    Art. 10 EMRK; Art. 5 Abs. 1 GG
    Meinungsfreiheit von Rechtsanwälten bei der öffentlichen Kritik von (Verfassungs-) Gerichten (Bedeutung der Rechtsanwälte für das Justizwesen; Presse; Schutz der Form der Meinungskundgabe; Eingriff; Rechtfertigung; Verhältnismäßigkeit; Anforderungen an den ...

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    AMIHALACHIOAIE v. MOLDOVA

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Violation of Art. 10 Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient Costs and expenses - claim dismissed (englisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    AMIHALACHIOAIE c. MOLDOVA

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Violation de l'art. 10 Préjudice moral - constat de violation suffisant Frais et dépens - demande rejetée (französisch)

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    AMIHALACHIOAIE v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

    [GEO] Violation of Art. 10;Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient;Costs and expenses - claim dismissed

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 ... (42)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

  • EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

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

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2004 - 60115/00
    Accordingly, many laws are inevitably couched in terms which, to a greater or lesser extent, are vague and whose interpretation and application are questions of practice ( Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1) , judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 31, § 49; and Hertel v. Switzerland , judgment of 25 August 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VI, pp.

    This ground comes close to the anglo-saxon notion of contempt of court which is intended to prevent the authority and the independence of the courts, as well as the rights of parties to proceedings, from being impaired by publications or other such acts ( The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom , judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, § 55).

  • EGMR, 28.03.1990 - 10890/84

    GROPPERA RADIO AG ET AUTRES c. SUISSE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2004 - 60115/00
    The degree of precision depends to a considerable degree on the content of the instrument in issue, the field it is designed to cover, and the number and status of those to whom it is addressed (see Groppera Radio AG and Others v. Switzerland , judgment of 28 March 1990, Series A no. 173, p. 26, § 68).
  • EGMR, 24.02.1994 - 15450/89

    CASADO COCA v. SPAIN

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2004 - 60115/00
    Such a position explains the usual restrictions on the conduct of members of the Bar (see Casado Coca v. Spain , judgment of 24 February 1994, Series A no. 285-A, p. 21, § 54).
  • EGMR, 22.02.1989 - 11508/85

    BARFOD c. DANEMARK

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2004 - 60115/00
    Even if the applicant's comments could have been interpreted as a lack of respect or "regard" for the Constitutional Court (see paragraph 36 of the judgment), the general interest in allowing a public debate about the independence of lawyers, as in this case, weighs more heavily than the interests of the judges of the Constitutional Court in being protected against criticism of the kind expressed in the interview with the applicant, a criticism which was, in fact, concise and cannot be considered as constituting a personal attack on the judges (as, for example, in Barfod v. Denmark , judgment of 22 February 1989, Series A no. 149; and Perna v. Italy [GC], no. 48898/99, judgment of 6 May 2003).
  • EGMR, 27.05.2003 - 43425/98

    Meinungsfreiheit (konstitutive Bedeutung in der Demokratie; Eingriff; …

    Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2004 - 60115/00
    In that connection, the Court finds that even though the remarks may be regarded as showing a certain lack of regard for the Constitutional Court following its decision, they cannot be described as grave or as insulting of the judges of the Constitutional Court (see, mutatis mutandis , Ska³ka v. Poland , no. 43425/98, § 34, 27 May 2003; Perna v. Italy [GC], no. 48898/99, § 47, ECHR 2003-V; and Nikula cited above, §§ 48, 52).
  • EGMR, 12.02.2008 - 14277/04

    GUJA v. MOLDOVA

    The Court reiterates that in order for costs and expenses to be included in an award under Article 41 of the Convention, it must be established that they were actually and necessarily incurred and were reasonable as to quantum (see, for example, Amihalachioaie v. Moldova, no. 60115/00, § 47, ECHR 2004-III).
  • EGMR, 23.04.2015 - 29369/10

    MORICE c. FRANCE

    They therefore play a key role in ensuring that the courts, whose mission is fundamental in a State based on the rule of law, enjoy public confidence (see Schöpfer v. Switzerland, 20 May 1998, §§ 29-30, Reports 1998-III; Nikula v. Finland, no. 31611/96, § 45, ECHR 2002-II; Amihalachioaie v. Moldova, no. 60115/00, § 27, ECHR 2004-III; Kyprianou, cited above, § 173; André and Another v. France, no. 18603/03, § 42, 24 July 2008; and Mor, cited above, § 42).
  • EGMR, 18.01.2005 - 74153/01

    POPOV v. MOLDOVA (No. 1)

    The Court recalls that in order for costs and expenses to be included in an award under Article 41, it must be established that they were actually and necessarily incurred and were reasonable as to quantum (see, for example, Amihalachioaie v. Moldova, no. 60115/00, § 47, ECHR 2004-...).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.

Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 23.04.2002 - 60115/00   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2002,35221
EGMR, 23.04.2002 - 60115/00 (https://dejure.org/2002,35221)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 23.04.2002 - 60115/00 (https://dejure.org/2002,35221)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 23. April 2002 - 60115/00 (https://dejure.org/2002,35221)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2002,35221) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

Verfahrensgang

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