Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NOVAYA GAZETA AND BORODYANSKIY v. RUSSIA

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 35 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible No violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom to impart information) (englisch)

Sonstiges (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  Novaya Gazeta and Borodyanskiy v. Russia

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (6)Neu Zitiert selbst (13)

• EGMR, 30.10.2012 - 6086/10

  KARPETAS c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  Even where a statement amounts to a value judgment, the proportionality of an interference may depend on whether there exists a sufficient factual basis for that statement, since even a value judgment without any factual basis to support it may be excessive (see De Haes and Gijsels, cited above, § 47; Jerusalem v. Austria, no. 26958/95, § 43, ECHR 2001-II, and Karpetas v. Greece, no. 6086/10, § 78, 30 October 2012).
• EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02

  LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  The Court has previously considered generally known facts, basic verification, or independent research as a minimal factual basis for statements containing value judgments (see, mutatis mutandis, Mahmudov and Agazade v. Azerbaijan, cited above, § 44, and, mutatis mutandis, Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 55, ECHR 2007-IV).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  While enjoying the protection afforded by the Convention, journalists must, when exercising their duties, abide by the principles of responsible journalism, namely to act in good faith, provide accurate and reliable information, objectively reflect the opinions of those involved in a public debate, and refrain from pure sensationalism (see Fressoz and Roire [GC], cited above, §§ 45, 52; Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, §§ 59, 65, ECHR 1999-III; Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC], no. 49017/99, § 78, ECHR 2004-XI; Stoll v. Switzerland [GC], no. 69698/01, §§ 102-103, 149, ECHR 2007-V; and Krone Verlag GmbH v. Austria, no. 27306/07, §§ 46-47, 19 June 2012).

 
• EGMR, 27.02.2001 - 26958/95

  JERUSALEM c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  Even where a statement amounts to a value judgment, the proportionality of an interference may depend on whether there exists a sufficient factual basis for that statement, since even a value judgment without any factual basis to support it may be excessive (see De Haes and Gijsels, cited above, § 47; Jerusalem v. Austria, no. 26958/95, § 43, ECHR 2001-II, and Karpetas v. Greece, no. 6086/10, § 78, 30 October 2012).
• EGMR, 19.06.2012 - 27306/07

  KRONE VERLAG GMBH v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  While enjoying the protection afforded by the Convention, journalists must, when exercising their duties, abide by the principles of responsible journalism, namely to act in good faith, provide accurate and reliable information, objectively reflect the opinions of those involved in a public debate, and refrain from pure sensationalism (see Fressoz and Roire [GC], cited above, §§ 45, 52; Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, §§ 59, 65, ECHR 1999-III; Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC], no. 49017/99, § 78, ECHR 2004-XI; Stoll v. Switzerland [GC], no. 69698/01, §§ 102-103, 149, ECHR 2007-V; and Krone Verlag GmbH v. Austria, no. 27306/07, §§ 46-47, 19 June 2012).
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  Consequently, it falls to the Court to examine whether the interference was necessary in a democratic society, and, specifically, whether it was justified by any pressing social need and was proportionate to the aims pursued (see, for example, Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 45, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 10.03.2009 - 3002/03

  TIMES NEWSPAPERS LTD c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1 et N° 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  3002/03 and 23676/03, § 40, ECHR 2009).
• EGMR, 22.04.2010 - 40984/07

  FATULLAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  The values and principles underlying Article 10 of the Convention command that the national authorities shall always be guided by "relevant and sufficient reasons" (see, among other authorities, Chauvy and Others v. France, no. 64915/01, § 70, ECHR 2004-VI, and Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, no. 40984/07, § 84, 22 April 2010).
• EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72

  HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  Such are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness, without which there is no "democratic society" (see, notably, Handyside v. the United Kingdom, 7 December 1976, § 49, Series A no. 24; and, more recently, Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 78, 7 February 2012, and Mouvement raëlien suisse v. Switzerland [GC], no. 16354/06, § 48, ECHR 2012 (extracts).
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 15890/89

  JERSILD v. DENMARK

  Auszug aus EGMR, 28.03.2013 - 14087/08

  Nevertheless, the guarantees or Article 10 of the Convention are not absolute and are subject to possible restrictions, which, however, must be construed strictly, and the need for any restrictions must be established convincingly (see, among other authorities, Jersild v. Denmark, judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 298, pp. 23-24, § 31, and Janowski v. Poland [GC], no. 25716/94, § 30, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 26.11.1991 - 13585/88

  OBSERVER ET GUARDIAN c. ROYAUME-UNI
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 25716/94

  JANOWSKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

• EGMR, 20.10.2015 - 11882/10

  PENTIKÄINEN c. FINLANDE

  In the Court's case-law, the concept of responsible journalism has so far focused mainly on issues relating to the contents of a publication or an oral statement (see, for example, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], cited above, §§ 65-67; Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], cited above, §§ 52-55; Krone Verlag GmbH v. Austria, no. 27306/07, §§ 46-47, 19 June 2012; Novaya Gazeta and Borodyanskiy v. Russia, no. 14087/08, § 37, 28 March 2013; Perna v. Italy [GC], no. 48898/99, § 47, ECHR 2003-V; Times Newspapers Ltd v. the United Kingdom (nos. 1 and 2), cited above, § 45; Ungváry and Irodalom Kft v. Hungary, no. 64520/10, § 42, 3 December 2013; and Yordanova and Toshev v. Bulgaria, no. 5126/05, §§ 53 and 55, 2 October 2012) rather than on the public conduct of a journalist.
• EGMR, 16.04.2015 - 14134/07

  ARMELLINI AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA

  While enjoying the protection afforded by the Convention, journalists must, when exercising their duties, abide by the principles of responsible journalism, namely to act in good faith, provide accurate and reliable information, objectively reflect the opinions of those involved in a public debate, and refrain from pure sensationalism (see Novaya Gazeta and Borodyanskiy v. Russia, no. 14087/08, § 37, 28 March 2013 with further references and mutatis mutandis Bargão and Domingos Correia v. Portugal, nos. 53579/09 and 53582/09, § 40, 15 November 2012).
• EGMR, 07.07.2020 - 69575/10

  RASHKIN v. RUSSIA

  That award was unusually high in absolute terms but also many times higher in relation to awards in comparable defamation cases that have come before the Court (see, for example, Grinberg v. Russia, no. 23472/03, § 12, 21 July 2005 - RUB 2, 500 to the Governor of the Ulyanovsk Region out of the RUB 500, 000 he had claimed; Fedchenko v. Russia, no. 33333/04, § 15, 11 February 2010 - RUB 5, 000 to a member of Parliament out of the RUB 500, 000 he had claimed; Novaya Gazeta and Borodyanskiy v. Russia, no. 14087/08, § 15, 28 March 2013 - RUB 60, 000 to the Governor of Omsk out of the RUB 500, 000 he had claimed).

 
• EGMR, 14.01.2020 - 27474/08

  PIROGOV c. RUSSIE

  Se référant aux arrêts Janowski c. Pologne ([GC], no 25716/94, CEDH 1999-I), Le?.ník c. Slovaquie (no 35640/97, CEDH 2003-IV), Novaya Gazeta et Borodyanskiy c. Russie (no 14087/08, 28 mars 2013), et OOO « Vesti'et Ukhov c. Russie (no 21724/03, 30 mai 2013), il expose que L.M., en tant que fonctionnaire, devait pouvoir s'acquitter de ses fonctions en bénéficiant de la confiance du public sans être indûment perturbé par des attaques verbales offensantes.
• EGMR, 27.02.2018 - 57676/11

  PETKEVICIUTE v. LITHUANIA

  In this connection, the Court notes that Article 10 of the Convention includes not only the freedom to hold opinions but also the freedom to impart information and ideas, and it has been applied numerous times in cases concerning interference with the rights of publishers who were not themselves the authors of the impugned publications (see, among many other authorities, Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 75, 7 February 2012; Novaya Gazeta and Borodyanskiy v. Russia, no. 14087/08, § 31, 28 March 2013; and Satakunnan Markkinapörssi Oy and Satamedia Oy v. Finland [GC], no. 931/13, §§ 139-40, ECHR 2017 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 15.06.2021 - 30084/11

  STOLBUNOV AND MOO SPRAVEDLIVOST v. RUSSIA

  These awards were unusually high in absolute terms but also many times higher in relation to awards in comparable defamation cases that have come before the Court (see for example, Fedchenko v. Russia, no. 33333/04, § 15, 11 February 2010, and Novaya Gazeta and Borodyanskiy v. Russia, no. 14087/08, § 15, 28 March 2013).