Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  WOLEK, KASPROW AND LESKI v. POLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 10 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (15)

• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 30544/96

  GARCÍA RUIZ v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  It is not its function to deal with errors of fact or law allegedly committed by a national court unless and in so far as they may have infringed rights and freedoms protected by the Convention (see García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 04.04.2006 - 33352/02

  KELLER v. HUNGARY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  They carried out a careful balancing exercise between the interests involved (compare and contrast Keller v. Hungary (dec.), no. 33352/02, 4 April 2006 and Kwiecien v. Poland, no. 51744/99, §..., ECHR 2007-...).
• EGMR, 13.07.1995 - 18139/91

  TOLSTOY MILOSLAVSKY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  The Court notes that no damages were awarded, despite the fact that the plaintiff had sought an award of PLN 2, 500,000 to be paid to the Polish Red Cross which, if awarded, could arguably have been ruinous to the publisher of "Zycie" (contrast Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 13 July 1995, Series A no. 316-B, §§ 46-51, mutatis mutandis).

 
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  By reason of these "duties and responsibilities", 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, for example, Goodwin v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 March 1996, Reports 1996-II, § 39; Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 54, ECHR 1999-I; Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC], no. 49017/99, § 78, ECHR 2004-XI; Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 67, ECHR 2007-...).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  In this connection, the Court reiterates that the obligations of journalists referred to above require that the media should be able to reasonably regard their sources as reliable with respect to the allegation which they make and that the more serious such an allegation is, the more solid the factual basis has to be (see Pedersen and Baadsgaard, cited above, § 78; see, among other authorities, McVicar v. the United Kingdom, no. 46311/99, § 84, ECHR 2002-III; Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 66).
• EGMR, 28.09.1999 - 28114/95

  DALBAN v. ROMANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  The Supreme Court referred to the Dalban v. Romania judgment of the Court (Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, ECHR 1999-VI).
• EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 29032/95

  FELDEK c. SLOVAQUIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  The Court must look at the interference with the applicant's right to freedom of expression in the light of the case as a whole, including the statements concerned and the context in which they were made and also the particular circumstances of those involved (see Feldek v. Slovakia, no. 29032/95, § 77, ECHR 2001-VIII).
• EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01

  STEEL ET MORRIS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  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 relied on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts (see, among many other authorities, Hertel v. Switzerland, judgment of 25 August 1998, Reports 1998-VI, pp. 2329-30, § 46; Pedersen and Baadsgaard, cited §§ 68-71; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 87, ECHR 2005-II; and Mamère v. France, no. 12697/03, § 19, ECHR 2006-...; ).
• EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02

  LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  By reason of these "duties and responsibilities", 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, for example, Goodwin v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 March 1996, Reports 1996-II, § 39; Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 54, ECHR 1999-I; Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC], no. 49017/99, § 78, ECHR 2004-XI; Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 67, ECHR 2007-...).
• EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88

  OBSERVER ET GUARDIAN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 21.10.2008 - 20953/06

  Were it otherwise, the press would be unable to play its vital role of "public watchdog" in imparting information of serious public concern (see, among other authorities, the Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom judgment of 26 November 1991, Series A no. 216, pp. 29-30, § 59; Gaweda v. Poland, no. 26229/95, § 34, ECHR 2002-II).
• EGMR, 23.05.1991 - 11662/85

  Oberschlick ./. Österreich
• EGMR, 28.08.1992 - 13704/88

  SCHWABE v. AUSTRIA
• EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85

  CASTELLS v. SPAIN
• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 15890/89

  JERSILD v. DENMARK

• EGMR, 19.04.2011 - 22385/03

  KASABOVA v. BULGARIA

  The allegation in the instant case was very serious (compare with CumpÇ?nÇ? and MazÇ?re, §§ 100 and 102, and Pedersen and Baadsgaard, § 80, both cited above, as well as with Wolek and Others v. Poland (dec.), no. 20953/06, 21 October 2008), and thus called for thorough research on the part of the applicant.
• EGMR, 03.04.2012 - 43206/07

  Kaperzyński ./. Polen

  By reason of the "duties and responsibilities" inherent in the exercise of 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 Goodwin v. the United Kingdom, 27 March 1996, § 39, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-II ; Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 54, ECHR 1999-I; and Wolek, Kasprów and Leski v. Poland (dec.), no. 20953/06, 21 October 2008).
• EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 44436/13

  DOROTA KANIA v. POLAND (No. 2)

  In this connection, the Court reiterates that the journalists" obligations referred to above require that the media should be able to reasonably regard their sources as reliable with respect to the allegation they make, and that the more serious an allegation is, the more solid the factual basis has to be (see Pedersen and Baadsgaard, cited above, § 78; McVicar v. the United Kingdom, no. 46311/99, § 84, ECHR 2002-III; Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas [GC], cited above, § 66; and Wolek, Kasprów and Leski v. Poland (dec.), no. 20953/06, 21 October 2008).