Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  FLUX v. MOLDOVA (No. 7)

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 26958/95

  JERUSALEM c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2009 - 25367/05

  It reiterates that, in accordance with its case-law, the existence of facts can be demonstrated, whereas the truth of value-judgments is not susceptible of proof (see Jerusalem v. Austria, no. 26958/95, § 42, ECHR 2001-II).
• EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88

  OBSERVER ET GUARDIAN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2009 - 25367/05

  The fact that news is a perishable commodity (see Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom, 26 November 1991, § 60, Series A no. 216) made unsuitable any request for access to information, as suggested by the Government, since it would have taken too long to obtain an answer.
• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2009 - 25367/05

  The Court notes that in the present case the article was written by a journalist and stresses the pre-eminent role of the press in a democratic society in imparting ideas and expressing opinions on political matters and other matters of public interest (see Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, § 65, Series A no. 30).
• EGMR, 23.05.1991 - 11662/85

  Oberschlick ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2009 - 25367/05

  Particularly strong reasons must be provided for any measure affecting this role of the press and limiting access to information which the public has the right to receive (see, amongst many authorities, Oberschlick v. Austria (no. 1), 23 May 1991, § 58, Series A no. 204).
• EGMR, 25.06.1992 - 13778/88

  THORGEIR THORGEIRSON v. ICELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.11.2009 - 25367/05

  However, it also reiterates that, as part of their role of "public watchdog", the media's reporting on "'stories' or 'rumours' - emanating from persons other than the applicant - or 'public opinion'" is to be protected where they are not completely without foundation (see Thorgeir Thorgeirson v. Iceland, 25 June 1992, § 65, Series A no. 239, and Timpul Info-Magazin and Anghel, cited above, § 36).

• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 09.06.2011 - C-163/10

  Generalanwalt Niilo Jääskinen erläutert die Bedeutung des Begriffs "in Ausübung …

  30 - EGMR, Urteil Flux gegen Moldawien vom 24. November 2009, Beschwerde Nr. 25367/05, § 39.
• EGMR, 19.04.2011 - 22385/03

  KASABOVA v. BULGARIA

  Indeed, in situations where on the one hand a statement of fact is made and insufficient evidence is adduced to prove it, and on the other the journalist is discussing an issue of genuine public interest, verifying whether the journalist has acted professionally and in good faith becomes paramount (see Flux v. Moldova (no. 7), no. 25367/05, § 41, 24 November 2009).
• EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 5126/05

  YORDANOVA AND TOSHEV v. BULGARIA

  Indeed, in situations where on the one hand a statement of fact is made and insufficient evidence is adduced to prove it, and on the other the journalist is discussing an issue of genuine public interest, verifying whether the journalist has acted professionally and in good faith becomes paramount (see Flux v. Moldova (no. 7), no. 25367/05, § 41, 24 November 2009).

 
• EGMR, 13.01.2015 - 62716/09

  LOZOWSKA c. POLOGNE

  La Cour rappelle que dans des situations où un journaliste avance des faits sans preuves suffisantes mais où son propos s'inscrit, d'un autre côté, dans la discussion d'un véritable problème d'intérêt général, il est primordial d'examiner si le journaliste s'est comporté de manière professionnelle et s'il était de bonne foi (Flux c. Moldova (no7), no 25367/05, § 41, 24 novembre 2009, Yordanova et Toshev c. Bulgarie, no 5126/05, § 48, 2 octobre 2012, Stankiewicz c. Pologne, no 48723/07, § 69, 14 octobre 2014).
• EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 31566/13

  TAVARES DE ALMEIDA FERNANDES AND ALMEIDA FERNANDES v. PORTUGAL

  In situations where on the one hand a statement of fact is made and insufficient evidence is adduced to prove it, and on the other hand the journalist is discussing an issue of genuine public interest, verifying whether the journalist has acted professionally and in good faith becomes paramount (see Kasabova v. Bulgaria, no. 22385/03, § 63, 19 April 2011, and Flux v. Moldova (no. 7), no. 25367/05, § 41, 24 November 2009).
• EGMR, 19.04.2011 - 3316/04

  BOZHKOV v. BULGARIA

  Indeed, in situations where on the one hand a statement of fact is made and insufficient evidence is adduced to prove it, and on the other the journalist is discussing an issue of genuine public interest, verifying whether the journalist has acted professionally and in good faith becomes paramount (see Flux v. Moldova (no. 7), no. 25367/05, § 41, 24 November 2009).