Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 18.03.2008 - 15601/02   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2008,61173
EGMR, 18.03.2008 - 15601/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,61173)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 18.03.2008 - 15601/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,61173)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 18. März 2008 - 15601/02 (https://dejure.org/2008,61173)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2008,61173) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (5)

  • EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 39457/03

    SAYGILI AND FALAKAOGLU v. TURKEY

    The Court reiterates the basic principles laid down in its judgments concerning Article 10 (see, in particular, the following judgments: Sener v. Turkey, no. 26680/95, §§ 39-43, 18 July 2000, Ä°brahim Aksoy v. Turkey, nos. 28635/95, 30171/96 and 34535/97, §§ 51-53, 10 October 2000; Lingens v. Austria, judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 103, p. 26, §§ 41-42, Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 45, ECHR 1999, Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, § 61, ECHR 1999-IV, and Kulis v. Poland, no. 15601/02, §§ 36-41, 18 March 2008).

    The punishment of a journalist for assisting in the dissemination of statements made by another person would seriously hamper the contribution of the press to the discussion of matters of public interest, and should not be envisaged unless there are particularly strong reasons for doing so (see, for example, Kulis v. Poland, no. 15601/02, § 38, 18 March 2008).

  • EGMR, 17.02.2009 - 38991/02

    SAYGILI AND FALAKAOGLU v. TURKEY (No. 2)

    The Court reiterates the basic principles laid down in its judgments concerning Article 10 (see, in particular, the following judgments: Sener v. Turkey, no. 26680/95, §§ 39-43, 18 July 2000; Ä°brahim Aksoy v. Turkey, nos. 28635/95, 30171/96 and 34535/97, §§ 51-53, 10 October 2000; Lingens v. Austria, 8 July 1986, §§ 41-42, Series A no. 103; Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 45, ECHR 1999-I; Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, § 61, ECHR 1999-IV; and Kulis v. Poland, no. 15601/02, §§ 36-41, 18 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 13.01.2009 - 39656/03

    AYHAN ERDOGAN v. TURKEY

    Moreover, the Court reiterates that while limits of critical comment are wider if a public figure is involved, as he or she is inevitably and knowingly exposed to public scrutiny and must therefore display a particularly high degree of tolerance (see Kulis v. Poland, no. 15601/02, § 47, 18 March 2008), the reputation of a politician, even a controversial one, must benefit from the protection afforded by the Convention (see Lindon, Otczakovsky-Laurnes and July v. France, [GC], cited above, § 57, ECHR 2007-...).
  • EGMR, 24.02.2009 - 23806/03

    DLUGOLECKI v. POLAND

    It is true that, whilst an individual taking part in a public debate on a matter of general concern is required not to overstep certain limits as regards - in particular - respect for the reputation and rights of others, he or she is allowed to have recourse to a degree of exaggeration or even provocation, or in other words to make somewhat immoderate statements (see Kulis v. Poland, no. 15601/02, § 47, 18 March 2008).
  • EGMR, 13.06.2017 - 58781/13

    ARNARSON v. ICELAND

    The Court thus concludes that by publishing his allegation without confirmation on its veracity, the applicant could not have been acting in good faith, and thus in accordance with the standards of responsible journalism (see, for example, Thoma v. Luxembourg, no. 38432/97, §§ 62 and 64, ECHR 2001-III, Kulis v. Poland, no. 15601/02, § 38, 18 March 2008 and Bédat v. Switzerland, cited above, § 50).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht