Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 51/06 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,36686) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
CARAGEA v. ROMANIA
No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life) (englisch)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[FRE]
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 12.10.2010 - 28999/03
TIMCIUC v. ROMANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 51/06
The relevant provisions of the Civil and Criminal Codes concerning insult and defamation and liability for paying damages, in force at the material time, as well as the subsequent amendments to them, are described in CumpÇ?nÇ? and MazÇ?re v. Romania ([GC], no. 33348/96, §§ 55-56, ECHR 2004-XI and Timciuc v. Romania ((dec.), no. 28999/03, §§ 95-97, 12 October 2010).Furthermore, the Court observes that the article commented on the applicant's activity as a manager and tangentially on his involvement with the justice system, but made no specific reference to any aspect of the applicant's private life as such (see, mutandis mutandis, Timciuc v. Romania (dec.), no. 28999/03, § 147, 12 October 2010).
- EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01
STEEL ET MORRIS c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 51/06
In that respect and in line with its case-law, the Court considers that for the reasons stated above, the applicant can be deemed a public figure, the extent of acceptable criticism in his respect being thus greater than in respect of private individuals (see Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 94, ECHR 2005-II Tanasoaica v. Romania, no. 3490/03, § 46, 19 June 2012). - EGMR, 06.02.2001 - 41205/98
TAMMER v. ESTONIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 51/06
Such are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness, without which there is no "democratic society" (see Tammer v. Estonia, no. 41205/98, § 59, ECHR 2001-I). - EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02
LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 08.12.2015 - 51/06
Nevertheless, in the light of the fact that journalistic freedom also covers possible recourse to a degree of exaggeration or even provocation (see Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 56, ECHR 2007-IV), and in view of the applicant's position as a public figure, the Court finds there is no manifestly insulting language in the disputed remarks about the applicant (see also Mamère v. France, no. 12697/03, § 25, ECHR 2006-XIII), such language remaining therefore protected by Article 10 of the Convention (contrast, Delfi AS, cited above, § 136).