Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SANCHEZ CARDENAS v. NORWAY

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 8 Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention and domestic proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 01.06.2006 - 12148/03
• EGMR, 04.10.2007 - 12148/03

Wird zitiert von ... (20)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 27.11.1992 - 13441/87

  OLSSON c. SUÈDE (N° 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2007 - 12148/03

  38-39, §§ 88-90; Olsson v. Sweden (no. 2), judgment of 27 November 1992, Series A no. 250, pp.
• EGMR, 24.03.1988 - 10465/83

  OLSSON v. SWEDEN (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2007 - 12148/03

  Thus, having regard to its own case-law (see, for instance, W. v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 8 July 1987, Series A no. 121, pp. 32-35, §§ 72-79; Zander v. Sweden, judgment of 25 November 1993, Series A no. 279-B, and Kerojärvi v. Finland, judgment of 19 July 1995, Series A no. 322; see also more recent judgments, where the applicability of Article 6 § 1 was undisputed: Olsson v. Sweden (no. 1), judgment of 24 March 1988, Series A no. 130, pp.
• EGMR, 25.11.1993 - 14282/88

  ZANDER v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2007 - 12148/03

  Thus, having regard to its own case-law (see, for instance, W. v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 8 July 1987, Series A no. 121, pp. 32-35, §§ 72-79; Zander v. Sweden, judgment of 25 November 1993, Series A no. 279-B, and Kerojärvi v. Finland, judgment of 19 July 1995, Series A no. 322; see also more recent judgments, where the applicability of Article 6 § 1 was undisputed: Olsson v. Sweden (no. 1), judgment of 24 March 1988, Series A no. 130, pp.
• EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 12945/87

  HADJIANASTASSIOU v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2007 - 12148/03

  All in all, under existing case-law, the national courts could only be obliged to indicate the grounds on which they based their decision (see, inter alia, Hadjianastassiou v. Greece, judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 252, p. 16, § 33).
• EGMR, 19.07.1995 - 17506/90

  KEROJÄRVI v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.10.2007 - 12148/03

  Thus, having regard to its own case-law (see, for instance, W. v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 8 July 1987, Series A no. 121, pp. 32-35, §§ 72-79; Zander v. Sweden, judgment of 25 November 1993, Series A no. 279-B, and Kerojärvi v. Finland, judgment of 19 July 1995, Series A no. 322; see also more recent judgments, where the applicability of Article 6 § 1 was undisputed: Olsson v. Sweden (no. 1), judgment of 24 March 1988, Series A no. 130, pp.

• EGMR, 09.04.2009 - 28070/06

  A. v. NORWAY

  In more recent cases decided under Article 8 of the Convention, the Court has recognised reputation (see White v. Sweden, no. 42435/02, § 26, 19 September 2006; and Pfeifer v. Austria, no. 12556/03, § 35, ECHR 2007-...) and also honour (see Sanchez Cardenas v. Norway, no. 12148/03, § 38, 4 October 2007) as part of the right to respect for private life.
• EGMR, 06.11.2018 - 25527/13

  VICENT DEL CAMPO v. SPAIN

  This also applies to a person's honour (see A. v. Norway, no. 28070/06, § 64, 9 April 2009; Sanchez Cardenas v. Norway, no. 12148/03, § 38, 4 October 2007; and Egill Einarsson v. Iceland, no. 24703/15, § 33, 7 November 2017).

  42. Accordingly, the Court finds that the inclusion by the High Court of Justice of the applicant's identity, coupled with the statement on his acts as part of its own reasoning in the judgment constituted an "interference" with the applicant's right to respect for his private life as guaranteed by Article 8 § 1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, C.C. v. Spain, no. 1425/06, § 26, 6 October 2009; Sanchez Cardenas v. Norway, no. 12148/03, § 34, 4 October 2007; and Z v. Finland, no. 22009/93, § 71, 25 February 1997).

• EGMR, 07.11.2017 - 24703/15

  EGILL EINARSSON v. ICELAND

  The same considerations apply to a person's honour (A. v. Norway, no. 28070/06, § 64, 9 April 2009, and Sanchez Cardenas v. Norway, no. 12148/03, § 38, 4 October 2007).

 
• EGMR, 27.05.2021 - 5671/16

  J.L. c. ITALIE

  En revanche, il lui incombe de déterminer si le raisonnement suivi par les juridictions et les arguments utilisés ont ou non abouti à une entrave au droit de la requérante au respect de sa vie privée et de son intégrité personnelle et s'il a emporté violation des obligations positives inhérentes à l'article 8 de la Convention (voir, mutatis mutandis, Sanchez Cardenas c. Norvège, no 12148/03, §§ 33-39, 4 octobre 2007, et Carvalho Pinto de Sousa Morais c. Portugal, no 17484/15, §§ 33-36, 25 juillet 2017).
• EGMR, 21.09.2010 - 34147/06

  POLANCO TORRES ET MOVILLA POLANCO c. ESPAGNE

  Les mêmes considérations s'appliquent à l'honneur d'une personne (voir Sanchez Cardenas c. Norvège, no 12148/03, § 38, 4 octobre 2007, et A. c. Norvège, no 28070/06, § 64, 9 avril 2009).
• EuG, 27.11.2018 - T-314/16

  VG/ Kommission

  Die gleichen Erwägungen gelten für die Ehre einer Person (EGMR, 4. Oktober 2007, Sanchez Cardenas/Norwegen, CE:ECHR:2007:1004JUD001214803, Nr. 38, und vom 9. April 2009, A./Norwegen, CE:ECHR:2009:0409JUD 002807006, Nr. 64).
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 21.11.2018 - C-558/17

  OZ/ EIB - Rechtsmittel - Öffentlicher Dienst - Personal der EIB - Sexuelle …

  50 Im Urteil vom 4. Oktober 2007, Sanchez Cardenas/Norwegen (CE:ECHR:2007:1004JUD001214803, § 37), hat der EGMR dem Umstand Rechnung getragen, dass die in Rede stehende Äußerung, die dort von einem Gericht im Rahmen eines Urteils abgegeben worden war, für die Entscheidung des Rechtsstreits unerheblich war.
• EGMR, 02.10.2014 - 15319/09

  HANSEN v. NORWAY

  The Court has also stated that a lower court (or authority) in turn must give such reasons as to enable the parties to make effective use of any existing right of appeal (see Hadjianastassiou, cited above, § 33; Hirvisaari, cited above, § 30; and Sanchez Cardenas v. Norway, no. 12148/03, § 49, 4 October 2007).
• EGMR, 25.03.2021 - 1864/18

  MATALAS v. GREECE

  The Court notes that it has not been submitted (nor does it appear) that the accusations made against L.P. in the above-mentioned official document concerned conduct that was regarded as criminal under domestic law (contrast White v. Sweden, no. 42435/02, § 25, 19 September 2006; Sanchez Cardenas v. Norway, no. 12148/03, §§ 37-39, 4 October 2007; Pfeifer v. Austria, no. 12556/03, §§ 47-48, 15 November 2007; and A. v. Norway, cited above, § 73).
• EGMR, 13.02.2018 - 61949/08

  SEFERI YILMAZ c. TURQUIE

  Les mêmes considérations s'appliquent à l'honneur d'une personne (Sanchez Cardenas c. Norvège, no 12148/03, § 38, 4 octobre 2007, et A. c. Norvège, no 28070/06, § 64, 9 avril 2009).
• EGMR, 18.05.2017 - 25322/12

  PETRIE c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 20.10.2020 - 36944/07

  KABOGLU ET ORAN c. TURQUIE (N° 2)
• EGMR, 20.06.2023 - 36705/16

  MARGARI v. GREECE
• EGMR, 17.07.2018 - 31221/15

  EGILL EINARSSON v. ICELAND (No. 2)
• EGMR, 21.11.2017 - 63903/10

  TARMAN c. TURQUIE
• EGMR, 20.06.2017 - 13812/09

  BOGOMOLOVA v. RUSSIA
• EGMR, 07.09.2021 - 45016/18

  ÇAKMAK c. TURQUIE
• EGMR - 51504/22 (anhängig)

  CAVALLUZZO v. ITALY
• EGMR, 22.02.2011 - 31328/09

  LOPES c. PORTUGAL
• EGMR, 24.11.2020 - 52737/18

  ÓMARSSON v. ICELAND