Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  OOO REGNUM v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression);Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  OOO REGNUM v. RUSSIA

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (14)

• EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 15449/09

  MARGULEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  Whereas the latter may have repercussions on one's dignity, the former are devoid of that moral dimension (see, in the context of defamation proceedings brought by public authorities, Margulev v. Russia, no. 15449/09, § 45, 8 October 2019).

  Whereas the latter may have repercussions on a person's dignity, the former is devoid of that moral dimension (see paragraph 66 of the judgment and Margulev v. Russia, no. 15449/09, § 45, 9 October 2019).

• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  The thrust of the impugned news items was not primarily to accuse a commercial company of committing offences or morally reprehensible acts, but to pass on the authorities" message on a public health issue (compare Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 63, ECHR 1999-III).
• EGMR, 10.05.2011 - 48009/08

  Keine Pflicht zur Vorabbenachrichtigung bei Veröffentlichung privater …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  (see, similarly, Hachette Filipacchi Associes (ICI PARIS) v. France, no. 12268/03, § 41, 23 July 2009; Timciuc v. Romania (dec.), no. 28999/03, § 144, 12 October 2010; Mosley v. the United Kingdom, no. 48009/08, § 111, 10 May 2011; and Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France [GC], no. 40454/07, § 91, ECHR 2015).

 
• EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 18139/91

  TOLSTOY MILOSLAVSKY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  Nor did the Circuit Court make any assessment, however perfunctory, of the proportionality of the sizeable amount claimed by the commercial company in respect of non-pecuniary damage to the alleged damage to its business reputation, thus disregarding the requirement under the Convention that an award of damages for defamation must bear a reasonable relationship of proportionality to the injury to reputation suffered (see Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, 13 July 1995, § 49, Series A no. 316-B, and Steel and Morris, cited above, § 96).
• EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 29032/95

  FELDEK c. SLOVAQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  The Court is not in a position to consider whether the consequences stemming from the impugned news items that the claimant had sustained, if any, called for the measures applied by the Circuit Court, including the award of damages in the amount of RUB 1, 000,000, in view of the fact that the judgment of 10 October 2007 did not discuss whether the impugned news items had affected the claimant, or its stock holders, in any manner, be it in terms of a decline in sales, the valuation of the stock, or otherwise (compare Feldek v. Slovakia, no. 29032/95, § 87, ECHR 2001-VIII).
• EGMR, 25.06.2002 - 51279/99

  Frankreich wegen Verletzung der Pressefreiheit zu Schadensersatz verurteilt

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  That the applicant company relied on the information gathered from official sources may not be held against it, as members of the media should be entitled to do so without having to undertake independent research (ibid., § 68, and Colombani and Others v. France, no. 51279/99, § 65, ECHR 2002-V).
• EGMR, 23.07.2009 - 12268/03

  HACHETTE FILIPACCHI ASSOCIES (ICI PARIS) c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  (see, similarly, Hachette Filipacchi Associes (ICI PARIS) v. France, no. 12268/03, § 41, 23 July 2009; Timciuc v. Romania (dec.), no. 28999/03, § 144, 12 October 2010; Mosley v. the United Kingdom, no. 48009/08, § 111, 10 May 2011; and Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France [GC], no. 40454/07, § 91, ECHR 2015).
• EGMR, 12.10.2010 - 28999/03

  TIMCIUC v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  (see, similarly, Hachette Filipacchi Associes (ICI PARIS) v. France, no. 12268/03, § 41, 23 July 2009; Timciuc v. Romania (dec.), no. 28999/03, § 144, 12 October 2010; Mosley v. the United Kingdom, no. 48009/08, § 111, 10 May 2011; and Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France [GC], no. 40454/07, § 91, ECHR 2015).
• EGMR, 27.10.2016 - 37614/11

  SHUKUROV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  Claims in respect of pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, unlike those in respect of non-pecuniary damage, are made on the basis of a precise calculation and require conversion into euros before an award can be made (see Shukurov v. Azerbaijan, no. 37614/11, § 32, 27 October 2016).
• EGMR, 13.06.2017 - 44294/06

  CHELTSOVA v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 22649/08

  Reiterating that statements of fact, unlike value judgments, should be susceptible of proof (see, among other authorities, Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC], no. 49017/99, § 76, ECHR 2004-XI, and Cheltsova v. Russia, no. 44294/06, § 80, 13 June 2017), the Court will discuss the existence of such proof as regards the impugned news items in paragraphs 72 to 76 below.
• EGMR, 08.11.2016 - 18030/11

  MAGYAR HELSINKI BIZOTTSÁG v. HUNGARY
• EGMR, 04.12.2018 - 11257/16

  Regeln für Hyperlinks konkretisiert
• EGMR, 19.07.2011 - 23954/10

  Zur Meinungsfreiheit in Ungarn
• EGMR, 13.06.2017 - 58781/13

  ARNARSON v. ICELAND

• EGMR, 16.01.2024 - 39685/19

  SASMA c. TÜRKIYE

  Quant à la nécessité de l'ingérence, la Cour renvoie aux principes généraux concernant le droit à la liberté d'expression et les critères qui doivent guider son appréciation - et surtout celle des juridictions internes - dans la mise en balance de ce droit avec le droit à la réputation commerciale d'une société (Ärztekammer für Wien et Dorner c. Autriche, no 8895/10, §§ 62-67, 16 février 2016, et OOO Regnum c. Russie, no 22649/08, §§ 58-63 et 66, 8 septembre 2020).
• EGMR, 15.03.2022 - 2840/10

  OOO MEMO v. RUSSIA

  Yet the ambit of the "protection of the reputation... of others" clause of paragraph 2 of Article 10 is not restricted to natural persons, notwithstanding a difference between the reputational interests of a legal entity and the reputation of an individual as a member of society in so far as the former are devoid of the moral dimension of human dignity (see OOO Regnum v. Russia, no. 22649/08, § 66, 8 September 2020).
• EGMR, 11.05.2021 - 44561/11

  RID NOVAYA GAZETA AND ZAO NOVAYA GAZETA v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that there is a possibility under Article 41 of the Convention that a commercial company may be awarded monetary compensation for non-pecuniary damage (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV; see also Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia, no. 42911/08, §§ 140-41, 21 February 2017, and OOO Regnum v. Russia, no. 22649/08, § 91, 8 September 2020).
• EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 43351/12

  OOO INFORMATSIONNOYE AGENTSTVO TAMBOV-INFORM v. RUSSIA

  Having said this, the Court notes that the facts of the present case concern the exercise of the right to freedom of expression via an Internet-based media outlet, specifically through a website owned by the applicant company and run by its information agency (compare with Ólafsson v. Iceland, no. 58493/13, § 46, 16 March 2017; Arnarson v. Iceland, no. 58781/13, § 37, 13 June 2017; OOO Regnum v. Russia, no. 22649/08, § 60, 8 September 2020; and OOO Flavus and Others v. Russia, nos.
• EGMR, 16.02.2023 - 47064/20

  MAUVOISIN DELAVAUD c. FRANCE

  Elle rappelle également les critères qui doivent guider son appréciation - et, surtout, celle des juridictions internes - de la nécessité d'une ingérence lorsque le droit à la liberté de la presse est mis en balance avec le droit à la réputation commerciale d'une société: la contribution à un débat d'intérêt général, le contenu, la forme et les répercussions de la publication, le mode d'obtention des informations et leur véracité ainsi que la gravité de la sanction imposée aux journalistes ou aux éditeurs (OOO Regnum c. Russie, no 22649/08, § 67, 8 septembre 2020, Uj c. Hongrie, no 23954/10, §§ 19 à 24, 19 juillet 2011).