Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  CIHAN ÖZTÜRK v. TURKEY

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 10 Pecuniary damage - award Non-pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 17095/03

  In view of the above, the Court considers that the applicant's criticism in the impugned article may be regarded as imparting information or ideas in order to contribute to a debate on a matter of legitimate public interest (see Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 50, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 26958/95

  JERUSALEM c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 17095/03

  The requirement to prove the truth of a value judgment is impossible to fulfil and infringes freedom of opinion itself, which is a fundamental part of the right secured by Article 10" (see Jerusalem v. Austria, no. 26958/95, § 42, ECHR 2001-II, and Busuioc v. Moldova, no. 61513/00, § 61, 21 December 2004).
• EGMR, 21.12.2004 - 61513/00

  BUSUIOC v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 17095/03

  The requirement to prove the truth of a value judgment is impossible to fulfil and infringes freedom of opinion itself, which is a fundamental part of the right secured by Article 10" (see Jerusalem v. Austria, no. 26958/95, § 42, ECHR 2001-II, and Busuioc v. Moldova, no. 61513/00, § 61, 21 December 2004).

 
• EGMR, 25.06.1992 - 13778/88

  THORGEIR THORGEIRSON v. ICELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 17095/03

  In the same vein, the Court reiterates that, as part of their role as a "public watchdog", the media's reporting on ""stories" or "rumours" - emanating from persons other than an applicant - or "public opinion"" is to be protected where they are not completely without foundation (see Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 65, Series A no. 239).
• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 17095/03

  Furthermore, although the applicant is not a journalist, given that the defamation proceedings were brought against the applicant together with the editor-in-chief of the magazine, the Court observes that the pre-eminent role of the press in a democratic society to impart ideas and opinions on matters of public interest must also be taken into consideration when examining the interference at issue (see Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, § 65, Series A no. 30).
• EGMR, 23.05.1991 - 11662/85

  Oberschlick ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.06.2009 - 17095/03

  In this regard, particularly strong reasons must be provided for any measure affecting this role of the press and limiting access to information which the public has the right to receive (see, amongst many authorities, Oberschlick v. Austria (no. 1), 23 May 1991, § 58, Series A no. 204).