Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 7877/03 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2010,62672) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
MYRSKYY v. UKRAINE
Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 10 Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)
Kurzfassungen/Presse
- lehofer.at (Kurzinformation)
Myrskyy gegen Ukraine
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93
NILSEN AND JOHNSEN v. NORWAY
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 7877/03
As set forth in Article 10, this freedom is subject to exceptions, which must, however, be construed strictly, and the need for any restrictions must be established convincingly (see Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 43, ECHR 1999-VIII). - EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 26958/95
JERUSALEM c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 7877/03
As to the finding that the Party had as an aim the instillation of extreme nationalist ideology, the Court notes that the applicant was able to bring all the evidence he wished in order to support his claims in this regard (see and contrast with Jerusalem v. Austria, no. 26958/95, § 45, ECHR 2001-II), but the courts nevertheless decided that the aims of the Party were to be established on the basis of its programme, and therefore found against the applicant on the point. - EGMR, 30.11.2006 - 10807/04
VERAART v. THE NETHERLANDS
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 7877/03
In doing so, the Court has to satisfy itself that the national authorities applied standards which were in conformity with the principles embodied in Article 10 and, moreover, that they based themselves on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts (see Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298, and Veraart v. the Netherlands, no. 10807/04, § 61, 30 November 2006). - EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 15890/89
JERSILD v. DENMARK
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 7877/03
In doing so, the Court has to satisfy itself that the national authorities applied standards which were in conformity with the principles embodied in Article 10 and, moreover, that they based themselves on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts (see Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298, and Veraart v. the Netherlands, no. 10807/04, § 61, 30 November 2006). - EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93
BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE
Auszug aus EGMR, 20.05.2010 - 7877/03
On the issue whether the interference was necessary "in a democratic society", the Court reiterates that this depends on whether the interference complained of corresponded to a pressing social need, whether it was proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued and whether the reasons given by the national authorities to justify it are relevant and sufficient (see Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 58, ECHR 1999-III).