Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ORLOVSKAYA ISKRA v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-General (Article 10-1 - Freedom to impart information);Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Neu Zitiert selbst (14)

• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 35382/97

  COMINGERSOLL S.A. v. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  As to non-pecuniary damage, the Court reiterates that there is a possibility under Article 41 of the Convention that a commercial company may be awarded monetary compensation for non-pecuniary damage (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV).
• EKMR, 16.04.1991 - 15404/89

  PURCELL AND OTHERS c. IRLANDE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  In considering the "duties and responsibilities" of a journalist, the potential impact of the medium concerned is an important factor; audiovisual media often have a much more immediate and powerful effect than print media (see Purcell and Others v. Ireland, no. 15404/89, Commission decision of 16 April 1991, Decisions and Reports 70).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  Although the press must not overstep certain bounds, particularly as regards the reputation and rights of others and the need to prevent the disclosure of confidential information, its duty is nevertheless to impart - in a manner consistent with its duties and responsibilities - information and ideas on all matters of public interest (see Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298; De Haes and Gijsels v. Belgium, 24 February 1997, § 37, Reports 1997-I; and Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 58, ECHR 1999-III).

 
• EGMR, 28.06.2001 - 24699/94

  VgT VEREIN GEGEN TIERFABRIKEN c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  This might be relevant where certain candidates or parties, because of their relative financial strength, might have obtained an unfair advantage over those with less resources by being able to spend more, for instance on political advertising (see TV Vest AS and Rogaland Pensjonistparti v. Norway, no. 21132/05, § 72, ECHR 2008 (extracts), and VgT Verein gegen Tierfabriken v. Switzerland, no. 24699/94, § 75, ECHR 2001-VI).
• EGMR, 07.06.2012 - 38433/09

  CENTRO EUROPA 7 S.R.L. AND DI STEFANO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  The level of precision required of domestic legislation - which cannot provide for every eventuality - depends to a considerable degree on the content of the law in question, the field it is designed to cover, and the number and status of those to whom it is addressed (see Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 142, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 22.04.2013 - 48876/08

  Verbot politischer Fernsehwerbung

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  In previous cases the Court has considered that the balancing exercise could take account, under the heading of the "rights of others", of the general public interest, for instance relating to absence of distortion of the electoral process, including fair competition between the candidates (see also Erdogan Gökçe v. Turkey, no. 31736/04, § 40, 14 October 2014, and Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom ([GC], no. 48876/08, §§ 78, 99 and 112, ECHR 2013 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 02.03.1987 - 9267/81

  MATHIEU-MOHIN ET CLERFAYT c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  Free elections and freedom of expression, particularly freedom of political debate, together form the bedrock of any democratic system (see Mathieu-Mohin and Clerfayt v. Belgium, 2 March 1987, § 47, Series A no. 113, and the Lingens v. Austria judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 103, §§ 41-42).
• EGMR, 22.05.2008 - 17550/03

  ALITHIA PUBLISHING COMPANY LTD & CONSTANTINIDES v. CYPRUS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  By reason of the "duties and responsibilities", which are inherent in the exercise of the freedom of expression, the safeguard afforded by Article 10 to journalists in relation to reporting on issues of general interest is subject to the proviso that they are acting in good faith in order to provide accurate and reliable information in accordance with the ethics of journalism (see Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas, § 65, cited above, and Alithia Publishing Company Ltd and Constantinides v. Cyprus, no. 17550/03, § 65, 22 May 2008).
• EGMR, 14.10.2010 - 4260/04

  ANDRUSHKO v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  The Court reiterates in this respect that publishers, irrespective of whether they associate themselves with the content of publications, play a full part in the exercise of freedom of expression by providing authors with a medium (see Editions Plon v. France, no. 58148/00, § 22, ECHR 2004-IV; and Andrushko v. Russia, no. 4260/04, § 42, 14 October 2010).
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 15890/89

  JERSILD v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08

  Although the press must not overstep certain bounds, particularly as regards the reputation and rights of others and the need to prevent the disclosure of confidential information, its duty is nevertheless to impart - in a manner consistent with its duties and responsibilities - information and ideas on all matters of public interest (see Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298; De Haes and Gijsels v. Belgium, 24 February 1997, § 37, Reports 1997-I; and Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 58, ECHR 1999-III).
• EGMR, 17.02.2004 - 39748/98

  MAESTRI c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 26.02.2009 - 29492/05

  KUDESHKINA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 29.01.2004 - 31697/03

  BERDZENISHVILI v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 15974/90

  PRAGER ET OBERSCHLICK c. AUTRICHE

• EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12

  TESLENKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  His case, concerning a presidential election, had to be distinguished from cases about parliamentary elections, that is, cases which engaged considerations relating to Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 as regards the legitimate aims for the interference with freedom of expression (of the print media, for instance, as in the case of Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia, no. 42911/08, § 102, 21 February 2017).

  [1] See, respectively, Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia (no. 42911/08, 21 February 2017); OOO Informatsionnoye Agentstvo Tambov-Inform v. Russia (no. 43351/12, 18 May 2021); and Assotsiatsiya NGO Golos and Others v. Russia (no. 41055/12, 16 November 2021).

• EGMR, 02.09.2021 - 45581/15

  SANCHEZ c. FRANCE

  S'il est vrai que la Cour accorde la plus haute importance à la liberté d'expression dans le contexte du débat politique et considère qu'on ne saurait restreindre le discours politique sans raisons impérieuses (paragraphe 84 ci-dessus), et qu'en période préélectorale les opinions et informations de toutes sortes doivent pouvoir circuler librement (Orlovskaya Iskra c. Russie, no 42911/08, § 110, 21 février 2017, et Magyar Kétfarkú Kutya Párt, précité, § 56), elle renvoie cependant à son constat quant à la nature clairement illicite des commentaires litigieux (paragraphes 81-88).
• EGMR, 20.01.2020 - 201/17

  MAGYAR KÉTFARKÚ KUTYA PÁRT v. HUNGARY

  For this reason, it is particularly important in the period preceding an election that opinions and information of all kinds be permitted to circulate freely (see Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia, no. 42911/08, § 110, 21 February 2017).

 
• EGMR, 31.08.2021 - 20002/13

  ASSOCIAZIONE POLITICA NAZIONALE LISTA MARCO PANNELLA ET RADICALI ITALIANI c. …

  Les restrictions apportées à la liberté pour les partis politiques d'exprimer leurs opinions font ainsi l'objet d'un contrôle rigoureux (voir, parmi d'autres, Magyar Kétfarkú Kutya Párt c. Hongrie [GC], no 201/17, § 100, 20 janvier 2020, et Orlovskaya Iskra c. Russie, no 42911/08, § 110, 21 février 2017).
• EGMR, 11.05.2021 - 44561/11

  RID NOVAYA GAZETA AND ZAO NOVAYA GAZETA v. RUSSIA

  The Court reiterates that there is a possibility under Article 41 of the Convention that a commercial company may be awarded monetary compensation for non-pecuniary damage (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV; see also Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia, no. 42911/08, §§ 140-41, 21 February 2017, and OOO Regnum v. Russia, no. 22649/08, § 91, 8 September 2020).
• EGMR, 02.05.2023 - 24108/15

  MESTAN c. BULGARIE

  C'est pourquoi il est particulièrement important en période préélectorale que les opinions et informations de toutes sortes puissent circuler librement (Magyar Kétfarkú Kutya Párt c. Hongrie [GC], no 201/17, § 100, 20 janvier 2020 ; voir aussi Orlovskaya Iskra c. Russie, no 42911/08, § 110, 21 février 2017, avec les références qui y sont citées).
• EGMR, 21.11.2017 - 16224/05

  REDAKTSIYA GAZETY ZEMLYAKI v. RUSSIA

  Among these, account should be taken of the company's reputation, uncertainty in decision-planning, disruption in the management of the company (for which there is no precise method of calculating the consequences) and lastly, albeit to a lesser degree, the anxiety and inconvenience caused to the members of the management team (see Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia, no. 42911/08, § 140, 21 February 2017).