Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BRIND ET AUTRES c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 13 MRK
  Irrecevable (französisch)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BRIND AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 13 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1994 - 18714/91

  The Government submit that the Licence and Agreement of 1981 in the case of the BBC and the Broadcasting Act 1981 in the case of the IBA provide the necessary regulatory background to the notices, and that, when taken together with the explanatory letter from the Home Office, the directions fall within the concept of "law" as defined by the European Court of Human Rights in the Sunday Times case (Eur. Court H.R., Sunday Times judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 31, para. 49).

  2 (Art. 10-2) of the Convention (see, for example, Eur. Court H.R., Sunday Times judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 31, para. 49).

• EGMR, 20.04.1993 - 14327/88

  SIBSON c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1994 - 18714/91

  48; Brannigan and McBride judgment of 26 May 1993, Series A no. 258, p. 50, para.
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1994 - 18714/91

  Moreover, the European Court of Human Rights has pointed to the link between the notion of "arguable claim" in its own case-law and the notion of "manifestly ill-founded" in Article 27 (Art. 27) of the Convention (Eur. Court H.R., Boyle and Rice judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, p. 23, paras. 52 and 54).

 
• EGMR, 24.03.1988 - 10465/83

  OLSSON v. SWEDEN (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1994 - 18714/91

  Thus a norm must be formulated with sufficient precision; the phrase "in accordance with the law", or the equivalent phrase "prescribed by law", does not merely refer back to domestic law, but also relates to the quality of the law, and a law conferring a discretion is not in itself inconsistent with the requirement of foreseeability provided that the scope of the discretion and the manner of its exercise are indicated with sufficient clarity (Eur. Court H.R., Olsson judgment of 24 March 1988, Series A no. 130, p. 30, para.
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 5947/72

  SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1994 - 18714/91

  2 (Art. 10-2) must be given the same interpretation as the phrase "in accordance with the law" (Eur. Court H.R., Silver judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, p. 33, para. 85).
• EGMR, 05.10.1988 - 9787/82

  WEEKS c. ROYAUME-UNI (ARTICLE 50)

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1994 - 18714/91

  The European Court of Human Rights has referred to the special problems involved in combating terrorism (Eur. Court H.R., Brogan and others judgment of 29 November 1988, Series A no. 145, p. 33, para.
• EGMR, 22.05.1990 - 12726/87

  AUTRONIC AG v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1994 - 18714/91

  Article 10 (Art. 10) rights to convey information can be interfered with by restrictions on the manner of conveying information, as well as on the content of the information (Nos. 11553/85 and 11658/85, Dec. 9.3.87, D.R. 51, p. 136, 144; Eur. Court H.R., Autronic judgment of 22 May 1990, Series A no. 178, p. 23, para. 47).
• EGMR, 23.05.1991 - 11662/85

  Oberschlick ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EKMR, 09.05.1994 - 18714/91

  The Commission recalls that freedom of the press affords the public one of the best means of discovering and forming an opinion of the ideas and attitudes of political leaders, and freedom of political debate is at the very core of the concept of a democratic society (Eur. Court H.R., Oberschlick judgment of 23 May 1991, Series A no. 204, p. 25, para. 58).

• EGMR, 13.02.2003 - 40153/98

  ÇETIN ET AUTRES c. TURQUIE

  La Cour ne doute pas que l'interdiction de la distribution et de l'introduction d'Ülkede Gündem dans la région soumise à l'état d'urgence, ordonnée par le préfet de cette région le 1er décembre 1997 en vertu des articles 11 e) de la loi no 2935 et 1 a) du décret-loi no 430, s'analyse en une ingérence dans le droit des requérants à la liberté d'expression, dont la liberté de communiquer des idées et des informations fait partie intégrante (voir, mutatis mutandis, Betty Purcell et autres c. Irlande, no 15404/89, décision de la Commission du 16 avril 1991, DR 70, p. 262, B. et O. c. Royaume-Uni, no 18714/91, décision de la Commission du 9 juin 1994, DR 77, p. 42, arrêt Vereinigung Demokratischer Soldaten Österreichs et Gubi c. Autriche du 19 décembre 1994, série A no 302, p. 14, § 27, et Association Ekin c. France, no 39288/98, § 42, CEDH 2001-VIII), ce qu'aucun comparant n'a contesté.
• EKMR, 11.09.1997 - 33742/96

  BAMBER v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Although it does not appear that Standing Order 5 section G rule 2B has the force of law in domestic terms, recalling the decision of the Court in Silver and others v. the United Kingdom (judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 61, pp. 33-36, paras. 86-90 and 94; see also No. 18714/91, Dec. 9.5.94, D.R. 77, p. 42) and having regard to the notice given to prisoners of the restriction in their contact with the media, the Commission finds that the interference in question was a sufficiently clear and foreseeable application of section 33(1) of the Prison Rules 1964 as to have been prescribed by law within the meaning of Article 10 para.