Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11, 24133/13 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2018,21021) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
MAKRADULI v. \
Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) (englisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
MAKRADULI v. \
[MAC] Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
MAKRADULI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA" and 1 other application
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11, 24133/13
- EGMR, 04.09.2019 - 64659/11
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (10)
- EGMR, 25.06.1992 - 13778/88
THORGEIR THORGEIRSON v. ICELAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
The applicant essentially raised a question about something that had already been subject to public discussion (see, mutatis mutandis, Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 65, Series A no. 239). - EGMR, 19.06.2012 - 36937/06
HAJNAL v. SERBIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
That is to say, the applicant must have paid them, or be bound to pay them, pursuant to a legal or contractual obligation, and they must have been unavoidable in order to prevent the violation found or to obtain redress (see Belchev v. Bulgaria, no. 39270/98, § 113, 8 April 2004, and Hajnal v. Serbia, no.36937/06, § 154, 19 June 2012). - EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 58148/00
ÉDITIONS PLON c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
According to the Court's case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see Editions Plon v. France, no. 58148/00, § 64, ECHR 2004-IV).
- EGMR, 08.04.2004 - 39270/98
BELCHEV v. BULGARIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
That is to say, the applicant must have paid them, or be bound to pay them, pursuant to a legal or contractual obligation, and they must have been unavoidable in order to prevent the violation found or to obtain redress (see Belchev v. Bulgaria, no. 39270/98, § 113, 8 April 2004, and Hajnal v. Serbia, no.36937/06, § 154, 19 June 2012). - EGMR, 21.03.2002 - 31611/96
NIKULA c. FINLANDE
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
In order to determine whether the above description of the applicant's statements and the manner in which the domestic courts dealt with the present case were in conformity with Convention standards, the Court will examine the expressions themselves, including the form in which the impugned remarks were conveyed and their context (see Stankiewicz and Others v. Poland, no. 48723/07, § 61, 14 October 2014, and Nikula v. Finland, no. 31611/96, §§ 44 and 46, ECHR 2002-II). - EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 42168/06
DMITRIYEVSKIY v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
In a democratic system the actions or omissions of the government must be subject to close scrutiny, not only by the legislative and judicial authorities, but also by public opinion (see Dmitriyevskiy v. Russia, no. 42168/06, § 96, 3 October 2017, and Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, § 61, ECHR 1999-IV). - EGMR, 17.05.2016 - 42461/13
KARÁCSONY ET AUTRES c. HONGRIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
That is the case because freedom of expression for members of parliament is political speech par excellence (see Karácsony and Others v. Hungary [GC], nos. 42461/13 and 44357/13, § 137, ECHR 2016 (extracts)). - EGMR, 22.04.2010 - 40984/07
FATULLAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
It has been the Court's constant approach to require very strong reasons for justifying restrictions on political speech, since broad restrictions imposed in individual cases would undoubtedly affect respect for freedom of expression in general in the State concerned (see Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 40984/07, § 117, 22 April 2010, and the authorities cited therein). - EGMR, 08.07.1999 - 26682/95
SÜREK c. TURQUIE (N° 1)
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
In a democratic system the actions or omissions of the government must be subject to close scrutiny, not only by the legislative and judicial authorities, but also by public opinion (see Dmitriyevskiy v. Russia, no. 42168/06, § 96, 3 October 2017, and Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, § 61, ECHR 1999-IV). - EGMR, 17.12.2004 - 33348/96
CUMPANA AND MAZARE v. ROMANIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 64659/11
The general principles concerning the necessity of an interference with freedom of expression emerging from the Court's case-law (see Medzlis Islamske Zajednice Brcko and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], no 17224/11, § 75, ECHR 2017 and CumpÇ?nÇ? and MazÇ?re v. Romania [GC], no. 33348/96, § 91, ECHR 2004-XI) have been summarised as follows:.