Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BODROZIC v. SERBIA

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 10 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05
• EGMR, 05.09.2018 - 32550/05

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (23)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 19.09.2006 - 23037/04

  MATIJASEVIC v. SERBIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  The relevant provisions concerning the Court of Serbia and Montenegro are set out in the Matijasevic v. Serbia judgment (no. 23037/04, §§ 12, 13 and 16-25, 19 September 2006).

  Lastly, concerning the Government's submission that the applicant should have lodged a complaint with the Court of Serbia and Montenegro, the Court reiterates that it has already held that this particular remedy was unavailable until 15 July 2005 and, moreover, remained ineffective until the break-up of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro (see Matijasevic v. Serbia, no. 23037/04, §§ 34-37, ECHR 2006-...).

• EuGH, 16.08.1989 - 57/89

  Vorläufiger Rechtsschutz - Einstweilige Anordnungen - Voraussetzungen - …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  The relevant provisions of the General Criminal Code (Osnovni krivicni zakon; published in the Official Gazette of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - OG SFRY - nos. 44/76, 36/77, 34/84, 37/84, 74/87, 57/89, 3/90, 38/90, 45/90, 54/90, the Official Gazette of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - OG FRY - nos.

  3 Z 25/85|AG Günzburg; 28.04.1986; F 39/85|VG Kassel; 04.02.1986; L 39/85">39/85, 45/89 and 57/89, as well as in OG FRY no. 31/93), inter alia, anyone who has suffered mental anguish as a consequence of a breach of his or her honour or reputation may, depending on its duration and intensity, sue for financial compensation before the civil courts and, in addition, request other forms of redress "which may be capable" of affording adequate non-pecuniary satisfaction.

• EGMR, 26.09.1995 - 17851/91

  Radikalenerlaß

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  The Court's task in exercising its supervisory function is to look at the interference complained of in the light of the case as a whole and determine whether the reasons adduced by the national authorities to justify it are "relevant and sufficient" (see Vogt v. Germany, judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 323, pp. 25-26, § 52; Jerusalem v. Austria, no. 26958/95, § 33, ECHR 2001-II).

• EGMR, 23.05.1991 - 11662/85

  Oberschlick ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  The Court reiterates at this point that it has constant case-law distinguishing facts from value judgments, the latter not being as such susceptible of proof (see, for example, Lingens v. Austria, judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 103, § 46; Oberschlick v. Austria (no. 1), 23 May 1991, § 63, Series A no. 204).
• EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 26958/95

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  The Court's task in exercising its supervisory function is to look at the interference complained of in the light of the case as a whole and determine whether the reasons adduced by the national authorities to justify it are "relevant and sufficient" (see Vogt v. Germany, judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 323, pp. 25-26, § 52; Jerusalem v. Austria, no. 26958/95, § 33, ECHR 2001-II).
• EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  It is in the first place for the national authorities to assess whether there is a "pressing social need" for a restriction on freedom of expression and, in making that assessment, they enjoy a certain margin of appreciation (see Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 45, ECHR 2007-...).
• EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85

  CASTELLS v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  Moreover, Article 10 protects not only "information" or "ideas" that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb (see, among many other authorities, Castells v. Spain, 23 April 1992, § 42, Series A no. 236, and Vogt,cited above, § 52).
• EGMR, 17.12.2004 - 33348/96

  CUMPANA AND MAZARE v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  Lastly, the Court reiterates that when assessing the proportionality of the interference, the nature and severity of the penalties imposed are also factors to be taken into account (see Cumpana and Mazare v. Romania, no. 33348/96, 17 December 2004, §§ 111-124; Sokolowski v. Poland, no. 75955/01, § 51, 29 March 2005).
• EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93

  NILSEN AND JOHNSEN v. NORWAY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  Pursuant to the Court's longstanding practice, there is little scope under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention for restrictions on debate on questions of public interest (see Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 46, ECHR 1999-VIII).
• EGMR, 28.09.1999 - 28114/95

  Auszug aus EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 32550/05

  Journalistic freedom also covers possible recourse to a degree of exaggeration, or even provocation (see Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 49, ECHR 1999-VI).
• EGMR, 20.01.2005 - 63378/00

  MAYZIT v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 06.11.2007 - 13909/05

  LEPOJIC v. SERBIA
• EGMR, 20.11.2007 - 27935/05

  FILIPOVIC v. SERBIA
• EuGH, 06.11.1979 - 16/79

  Danis
• BFH, 21.04.1997 - V R 22/93

  Zulässigkeit von Gegenvorstellungen
• EuGH - 29/78 (Verfahren ohne Entscheidung erledigt)

  Delfino / Kommission
• VG der Evangelischen Landeskirche in Württemberg, 01.06.2012 - 10/12
• VK Rheinland-Pfalz, 14.05.2002 - 11/02
• EuGH - 24/84 (Verfahren ohne Entscheidung erledigt)

  Kommission / Luxemburg
• LG Hof, 23.10.1989 - S 42/89
• DH Mannheim, 18.09.1990 - 16/90
• RG, 08.03.1889 - V 21/90

  Vorläufige Vollstreckbarkeit.
• RG, 26.04.1890 - I 45/90

  Kann dem durch den Besitz des Wechsels und der Protesturkunde legitimierten …

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen