Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DUPATE v. LATVIA

  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)

  DUPATE v. LATVIA

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

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 16.01.2014 - 13258/09

  LILLO-STENBERG AND SÆTHER v. NORWAY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2020 - 18068/11

  Merits General principles 46. The Court starts from the premise that the present case requires an examination of the fair balance that has to be struck between the applicants" right to the protection of their private life under Article 8 of the Convention and the publisher's, editor's and journalist's right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article 10 (see, for example, Lillo-Stenberg and Sæther v Norway, no. 13258/09, § 25, 16 January 2014).
• EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 40660/08

  Caroline von Hannover kann keine Untersagung von Bildveröffentlichungen über sie …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.11.2020 - 18068/11

  The principles with respect to the State's positive obligations and the criteria for balancing the protection of private life against freedom of expression were set out in the Court's 2004 judgment in the case of Von Hannover (cited above, §§ 57-60) and have subsequently been elaborated in Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) ([GC], nos. 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)), amongst other authorities.

• EGMR, 07.09.2023 - 77940/17

  INDEX.HU ZRT v. HUNGARY

  As the Court has previously held, although the publication of news about the private life of public figures is generally for the purposes of entertainment, it also contributes to the variety of information available to the public and undoubtedly benefits from the protection of Article 10 of the Convention (see Dupate v. Latvia, no. 18068/11, § 51, 19 November 2020).
• EGMR, 01.03.2022 - 35582/15

  I.V.T. v. ROMANIA

  Whilst in most cases it involves the possibility for an individual to refuse publication of the image, it also covers the individual's right to object to the recording, conservation and reproduction of the image (see López Ribalda and Others v. Spain [GC], nos. 1874/13 and 8567/13, §§ 87 and 89, 17 October 2019 and, for a case which also concerns the photograph of a child taken without parental consent, see Dupate v. Latvia, no. 18068/11, § 40, 19 November 2020).
• EGMR, 23.09.2021 - 26826/16

  RINGIER AXEL SPRINGER SLOVAKIA, A.S. v. SLOVAKIA (No. 4)

  The Court reiterates in this connection that although the publication of news about the private life of public figures is generally for the purposes of entertainment, it contributes to the variety of information available to the public and undoubtedly benefits from the protection of Article 10 of the Convention (see Dupate v. Latvia, no. 18068/11, § 51, 19 November 2020).