Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  IGOR KABANOV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 10 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 10 (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (11)

• EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 23556/94

  CEYLAN c. TURQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  In addition, the fairness of the proceedings, the procedural guarantees afforded (see, mutatis mutandis, Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-II) and the nature and severity of the penalties imposed (see Ceylan v. Turkey [GC], no. 23556/94, § 37, ECHR 1999-IV; Tammer v. Estonia, no. 41205/98, § 69, ECHR 2001-I; Skalka, no. 43425/98, §§ 41-42, 27 May 2003; and Lesník v. Slovakia, no. 35640/97, §§ 63-64, ECHR 2003-IV) are factors to be taken into account when assessing the proportionality of an interference with the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10.
• EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 42095/98

  DAKTARAS c. LITUANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  Secondly, the tribunal must also be impartial from an objective viewpoint, meaning it must offer sufficient guarantees to exclude any legitimate doubt in this respect (see, among numerous authorities, Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, § 30, ECHR 2000-X).
• EGMR, 06.02.2001 - 41205/98

  TAMMER v. ESTONIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  In addition, the fairness of the proceedings, the procedural guarantees afforded (see, mutatis mutandis, Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-II) and the nature and severity of the penalties imposed (see Ceylan v. Turkey [GC], no. 23556/94, § 37, ECHR 1999-IV; Tammer v. Estonia, no. 41205/98, § 69, ECHR 2001-I; Skalka, no. 43425/98, §§ 41-42, 27 May 2003; and Lesník v. Slovakia, no. 35640/97, §§ 63-64, ECHR 2003-IV) are factors to be taken into account when assessing the proportionality of an interference with the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10.

 
• EGMR, 09.07.2002 - 46468/99

  MANOUSSOS v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  Furthermore, the persistent use of insulting or provocative language by an applicant may be considered an abuse of the right of application within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention (see Manoussos v. the Czech Republic and Germany (dec.), no. 46468/99, 9 July 2002; Duringer and Grunge v. France (dec.), nos.
• EGMR, 11.03.2003 - 35640/97

  LESNIK c. SLOVAQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  In addition, the fairness of the proceedings, the procedural guarantees afforded (see, mutatis mutandis, Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-II) and the nature and severity of the penalties imposed (see Ceylan v. Turkey [GC], no. 23556/94, § 37, ECHR 1999-IV; Tammer v. Estonia, no. 41205/98, § 69, ECHR 2001-I; Skalka, no. 43425/98, §§ 41-42, 27 May 2003; and Lesník v. Slovakia, no. 35640/97, §§ 63-64, ECHR 2003-IV) are factors to be taken into account when assessing the proportionality of an interference with the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10.
• EGMR, 27.05.2003 - 43425/98

  Meinungsfreiheit (konstitutive Bedeutung in der Demokratie; Eingriff; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  In addition, the fairness of the proceedings, the procedural guarantees afforded (see, mutatis mutandis, Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-II) and the nature and severity of the penalties imposed (see Ceylan v. Turkey [GC], no. 23556/94, § 37, ECHR 1999-IV; Tammer v. Estonia, no. 41205/98, § 69, ECHR 2001-I; Skalka, no. 43425/98, §§ 41-42, 27 May 2003; and Lesník v. Slovakia, no. 35640/97, §§ 63-64, ECHR 2003-IV) are factors to be taken into account when assessing the proportionality of an interference with the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10.
• EGMR, 29.06.2004 - 64915/01

  CHAUVY AND OTHERS v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  In particular, the Court must determine whether the measure taken was "proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued" (see The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, p. 38, § 62, Series A no. 30, and Chauvy and Others v. France, no. 64915/01, § 70, ECHR 2004-VI).
• EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01

  STEEL ET MORRIS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  In addition, the fairness of the proceedings, the procedural guarantees afforded (see, mutatis mutandis, Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-II) and the nature and severity of the penalties imposed (see Ceylan v. Turkey [GC], no. 23556/94, § 37, ECHR 1999-IV; Tammer v. Estonia, no. 41205/98, § 69, ECHR 2001-I; Skalka, no. 43425/98, §§ 41-42, 27 May 2003; and Lesník v. Slovakia, no. 35640/97, §§ 63-64, ECHR 2003-IV) are factors to be taken into account when assessing the proportionality of an interference with the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10.
• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  In particular, the Court must determine whether the measure taken was "proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued" (see The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, p. 38, § 62, Series A no. 30, and Chauvy and Others v. France, no. 64915/01, § 70, ECHR 2004-VI).
• EGMR, 24.02.1993 - 14396/88

  FEY v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2011 - 8921/05

  What is at stake as regards protection of the authority of the judiciary is the confidence which the courts in a democratic society must inspire in the accused, as far as criminal proceedings are concerned, and also in the public at large (see, mutatis mutandis, among many other authorities, Fey v. Austria, judgment of 24 February 1993, Series A no. 255-A, p. 12, § 30).
• EGMR, 04.02.2003 - 61164/00

  DURINGER et AUTRES et GRUNGE contre la FRANCE

• EGMR, 16.09.2014 - 42461/13

  KARÁCSONY AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

  L'équité de la procédure et les garanties procédurales accordées sont des facteurs à prendre en compte lorsqu'est appréciée la proportionnalité d'une ingérence dans la liberté d'expression garantie par l'article 10 (Association Ekin, précité, § 61 ; Steel et Morris c. Royaume-Uni, no 68416/01, § 95, CEDH 2005-II ; Lombardi Vallauri c. Italie, no 39128/05, §§ 45-46, 20 octobre 2009 ; Igor Kabanov c. Russie, no 8921/05, § 52, 3 février 2011, et Cumhuriyet Vakfi et autres c. Turquie, no 28255/07, § 59, 8 octobre 2013).
• EGMR, 15.09.2022 - 22287/08

  ANATOLIY YEREMENKO v. UKRAINE

  In addition, the fairness of the proceedings and the procedural guarantees afforded are factors to be taken into account when assessing the proportionality of an interference with respect to the right to freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention, including a close examination of the procedural safeguards embedded in the system to prevent arbitrary encroachments upon the freedom of expression (see Association Ekin v. France, no. 39288/98, § 61, ECHR 2001-VIII; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-II; Lombardi Vallauri v. Italy, no. 39128/05, §§ 45-46, 20 October 2009; and Igor Kabanov v. Russia, no. 8921/05, § 52, 3 February 2011).
• EGMR, 16.09.2014 - 44357/13

  SZÉL ET AUTRES c. HONGRIE

  L'équité de la procédure et les garanties procédurales accordées sont des facteurs à prendre en compte lorsqu'est appréciée la proportionnalité d'une ingérence dans la liberté d'expression garantie par l'article 10 (Association Ekin, précité, § 61 ; Steel et Morris c. Royaume-Uni, no 68416/01, § 95, CEDH 2005-II ; Lombardi Vallauri c. Italie, no 39128/05, §§ 45-46, 20 octobre 2009 ; Igor Kabanov c. Russie, no 8921/05, § 52, 3 février 2011, et Cumhuriyet Vakfi et autres c. Turquie, no 28255/07, § 59, 8 octobre 2013).
• EGMR, 08.10.2013 - 28255/07

  CUMHURIYET VAKFI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY

  In addition, the fairness of the proceedings and the procedural guarantees afforded are factors to be taken into account when assessing the proportionality of an interference with respect to the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 10 (see Association Ekin, cited above, § 61; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 95, ECHR 2005-II; Lombardi Vallauri v. Italy, no. 39128/05, §§ 45-46, 20 October 2009; and Igor Kabanov v. Russia, no. 8921/05, § 52, 3 February 2011).