Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  M.L. v. SLOVAKIA

  Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Positive obligations;Article 8-1 - Respect for private life);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  M.L. v. SLOVAKIA

  Art. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08

  Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.10.2021 - 34159/17

  40660/08 and 60641/08, §§ 95-113, ECHR 2012; Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, §§ 78-95, 7 February 2012; and Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France [GC], no. 40454/07, §§ 83-93, ECHR 2015 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 58148/00

  ÉDITIONS PLON c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.10.2021 - 34159/17

  Admissibility 23. It is clear from the Court's case-law (see Hadri-Vionnet v. Switzerland, no. 55525/00, § 51, 14 February 2008, with further references; Editions Plon v. France, no. 58148/00, § 46, ECHR 2004-IV; and Putistin v. Ukraine, no. 16882/03, § 33, 21 November 2013), and the Government accepted, that dealing appropriately with the dead out of respect for the feelings of the deceased's relatives falls within the scope of Article 8 of the Convention.
• EGMR, 13.11.2003 - 39394/98

  SCHARSACH ET NEWS VERLAGSGESELLSCHAFT c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.10.2021 - 34159/17

  It reiterates that even a value judgment must be based on sufficient facts in order to constitute a fair comment under Article 10 and that the difference between a value judgment and a statement of fact finally lies in the degree of factual proof which has to be established (see, for example, Scharsach and News Verlagsgesellschaft v. Austria, no. 39394/98, § 40, ECHR 2003-XI, and Dyuldin and Kislov v. Russia, no. 25968/02, § 48, 31 July 2007).

 
• EGMR, 18.04.2013 - 7075/10

  AGEYEVY v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.10.2021 - 34159/17

  In particular, the right of journalists to divulge information concerning issues of general interest is subject to their acting in good faith and providing "reliable and precise" information in accordance with the ethics of journalism (see, for example, Godlevskiy v. Russia, no. 14888/03, § 42, 23 October 2008, and Ageyevy v. Russia, no. 7075/10, § 226, 18 April 2013).
• EGMR, 21.11.2013 - 16882/03

  PUTISTIN v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.10.2021 - 34159/17

  Admissibility 23. It is clear from the Court's case-law (see Hadri-Vionnet v. Switzerland, no. 55525/00, § 51, 14 February 2008, with further references; Editions Plon v. France, no. 58148/00, § 46, ECHR 2004-IV; and Putistin v. Ukraine, no. 16882/03, § 33, 21 November 2013), and the Government accepted, that dealing appropriately with the dead out of respect for the feelings of the deceased's relatives falls within the scope of Article 8 of the Convention.
• EGMR, 19.12.2006 - 62202/00

  RADIO TWIST A.S. v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.10.2021 - 34159/17

  The relevant provisions are summarised in the Court's judgment in Radio Twist a.s. v. Slovakia (no. 62202/00, §§ 33-36, ECHR 2006-XV).
• EGMR, 31.07.2007 - 25968/02

  DYULDIN AND KISLOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.10.2021 - 34159/17

  It reiterates that even a value judgment must be based on sufficient facts in order to constitute a fair comment under Article 10 and that the difference between a value judgment and a statement of fact finally lies in the degree of factual proof which has to be established (see, for example, Scharsach and News Verlagsgesellschaft v. Austria, no. 39394/98, § 40, ECHR 2003-XI, and Dyuldin and Kislov v. Russia, no. 25968/02, § 48, 31 July 2007).

• EGMR, 29.03.2022 - 2244/14

  SLIWCZYNSKI AND SZTERNEL v. POLAND

  In assessing the necessity of the interference, it is important to examine the way in which the relevant domestic authorities dealt with the case, and in particular whether they applied standards which were in conformity with the principles embodied in Article 10 of the Convention (see M.L. v. Slovakia, no. 34159/17, § 35, 14 October 2021).