Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2008,69864) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
KITA v. POLAND
(englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00
- EGMR, 02.12.2011 - 57659/00
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93
BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00
The Court has also repeatedly upheld the right to impart, in good faith, information on matters of public interest, even where this involved damaging statements about private individuals (see, mutatis mutandis, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, ECHR 1999-III), and has emphasised that the limits of acceptable criticism are still wider where the target is a politician (see Feldek v. Slovakia, no. 29032/95, § 74, ECHR 2001-VIII). - EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
NILSEN AND JOHNSEN v. NORWAY
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00
As set out in Article 10, this freedom is subject to exceptions, which must however be interpreted strictly, and the need for any restrictions must be established convincingly (see, among many other authorities, Janowski v. Poland [GC], no. 25716/94, § 30 ECHR 1999-I, and Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 43, ECHR 1999-VIII). - EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 29032/95
FELDEK c. SLOVAQUIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00
The Court has also repeatedly upheld the right to impart, in good faith, information on matters of public interest, even where this involved damaging statements about private individuals (see, mutatis mutandis, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, ECHR 1999-III), and has emphasised that the limits of acceptable criticism are still wider where the target is a politician (see Feldek v. Slovakia, no. 29032/95, § 74, ECHR 2001-VIII). - EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01
STEEL ET MORRIS c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00
The Court also notes that the nature and severity of the penalty imposed, as well as the "relevance" and "sufficiency" of the national courts" reasoning, are matters of particular relevance in assessing the proportionality of the interference under Article 10 § 2 (Pakdemirli v. Turkey, no. 35839/97, § 32, 22 February 2005; and Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 87, ECHR 2005-II). - EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 25716/94
JANOWSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00
As set out in Article 10, this freedom is subject to exceptions, which must however be interpreted strictly, and the need for any restrictions must be established convincingly (see, among many other authorities, Janowski v. Poland [GC], no. 25716/94, § 30 ECHR 1999-I, and Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 43, ECHR 1999-VIII).