Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/1992,17142
EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85 (https://dejure.org/1992,17142)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 23.04.1992 - 11798/85 (https://dejure.org/1992,17142)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 23. April 1992 - 11798/85 (https://dejure.org/1992,17142)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/1992,17142) 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

    CASTELLS v. SPAIN

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 14+10, Art. 14, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion) Violation of Art. 10 Not necessary to examine Art. 14+10 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings Costs and ...

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    CASTELLS c. ESPAGNE

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 14+10, Art. 14, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Exception préliminaire rejetée (non-épuisement) Violation de l'Art. 10 Non-lieu à examiner l'art. 14+10 Dommage matériel - demande rejetée Préjudice moral - constat de violation suffisant Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure nationale Remboursement ...

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (270)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

  • EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88

    OBSERVER ET GUARDIAN c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85
    There was apparently no precedent - hence the hesitation shown by the Supreme Court in its decision of 19 May 1982 (see paragraph 12 above) -, but that is immaterial here: it was a text which covered in a general fashion several possible types of insult and which had inevitably to be capable of being brought into play in new situations; the above-mentioned decision confined itself to applying it to different circumstances (see, mutatis mutandis, the Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom judgment of 26 November 1991, Series A no. 216, pp. 27-28, para. 53).

    Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" (see, inter alia, the Handyside v. the United Kingdom judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 24, p. 23, para. 49, and the Observer and Guardian judgment, cited above, Series A no. 216, p. 30, para. 59 (a)).

    65, and the Observer and Guardian judgment, cited above, Series A no. 216, p. 30, para.

    A Contracting State may make it subject to certain "restrictions" or "penalties", but it is for the Court to give a final ruling on the compatibility of such measures with the freedom of expression enshrined in Article 10 (art. 10) (see, mutatis mutandis, the Observer and Guardian judgment, cited above, Series A no. 216, para. 59 (c)).

  • EGMR, 06.11.1980 - 7367/76

    GUZZARDI v. ITALY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85
    As regards the merits of the submission, it observes that Article 26 (art. 26) must be applied "with some degree of flexibility and without excessive formalism"; it is sufficient that "the complaints intended to be made subsequently before the Convention organs" should have been raised "at least in substance and in compliance with the formal requirements and time-limits laid down in domestic law" (see the Guzzardi v. Italy judgment of 6 November 1980, Series A no. 39, p. 26, para. 72, and the Cardot v. France judgment of 19 March 1991, Series A no. 200, p. 18, para. 34).

    In its view, the problem of the admissibility of the defence of truth in relation to the offence of insulting the Government raised a question of statutory interpretation rather than an issue of compliance with the Constitution, and the application of Article 161 of the Criminal Code in the case under review was exclusively a matter for the ordinary courts (see paragraph 17 above; and, mutatis mutandis, the Guzzardi v. Italy judgment, cited above, Series A no. 39, p. 27, para. 72).

  • EGMR, 09.10.1979 - 6289/73

    AIREY v. IRELAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85
    As this question is not a fundamental aspect of the case, the Court does not consider it necessary to deal with it separately (see, inter alia, the Airey v. Ireland judgment of 9 October 1979, Series A no. 32, p. 16, para. 30).
     
  • EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

    SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85
    Although it must not overstep various bounds set, inter alia, for the prevention of disorder and the protection of the reputation of others, it is nevertheless incumbent on it to impart information and ideas on political questions and on other matters of public interest (see, mutatis mutandis, the Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 40, para.
  • EGMR, 25.03.1992 - 13343/87

    B. c. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85
    On this point the Court confines itself to referring to its consistent case-law, confirmed most recently in its B. v. France judgment of 25 March 1992 (Series A no. 232-C, p.45, paras. 35-36).
  • EGMR, 19.03.1991 - 11069/84

    CARDOT c. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85
    As regards the merits of the submission, it observes that Article 26 (art. 26) must be applied "with some degree of flexibility and without excessive formalism"; it is sufficient that "the complaints intended to be made subsequently before the Convention organs" should have been raised "at least in substance and in compliance with the formal requirements and time-limits laid down in domestic law" (see the Guzzardi v. Italy judgment of 6 November 1980, Series A no. 39, p. 26, para. 72, and the Cardot v. France judgment of 19 March 1991, Series A no. 200, p. 18, para. 34).
  • EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72

    HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 23.04.1992 - 11798/85
    Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" (see, inter alia, the Handyside v. the United Kingdom judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 24, p. 23, para. 49, and the Observer and Guardian judgment, cited above, Series A no. 216, p. 30, para. 59 (a)).
  • EGMR, 21.07.2011 - 28274/08

    Heinisch ./. Deutschland - Verletzung der Meinungsfreiheit bei Kündigung eines …

    Es steht den zuständigen staatlichen Behörden offen, Maßnahmen zu ergreifen, um angemessen und verhältnismäßig auf unbegründete oder böswillig gemachte Vorwürfe zu reagieren (siehe Castells ./. Spanien, 23. April 1992, § 46, Serie A Band 236).
  • EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 27510/08

    Leugnung des Völkermords an Armeniern von Meinungsfreiheit gedeckt

    Nor is there any evidence that, in spite of the presence of both Armenian and Turkish communities in Switzerland, this kind of statements could risk unleashing serious tensions and giving rise to clashes (contrast Castells v. Spain, 23 April 1992, § 39, Series A no. 236).
  • EGMR, 09.04.2024 - 39371/20

    DUARTE AGOSTINHO ET AUTRES c. PORTUGAL ET 32 AUTRES

    L'article 35 § 1 impose aussi de soulever devant l'organe interne adéquat, au moins en substance (voir, par exemple, Castells c. Espagne, 23 avril 1992, § 32, série A no 236, Gäfgen c. Allemagne [GC], no 22978/05, §§ 144 et 146, CEDH 2010, et Fressoz et Roire c. France [GC], no 29183/95, § 37, CEDH 1999-I)) et dans les formes et délais prescrits par le droit interne, les griefs que l'on entend formuler par la suite à Strasbourg ; il commande en outre l'emploi des moyens de procédure propres à empêcher une violation de la Convention (Akdivar et autres, précité, § 66).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht