Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 19.09.2013 - 23160/09   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2013,24906
EGMR, 19.09.2013 - 23160/09 (https://dejure.org/2013,24906)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 19.09.2013 - 23160/09 (https://dejure.org/2013,24906)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 19. September 2013 - 23160/09 (https://dejure.org/2013,24906)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2013,24906) 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

    STOJANOVIC v. CROATIA

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 35, Art. 41 MRK
    Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -General (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

  • juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

Sonstiges (2)

 
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 ... (7)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

  • EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93

    NILSEN AND JOHNSEN v. NORWAY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 19.09.2013 - 23160/09
    In this connection the Court reiterates that drawing inferences from the existing facts, such as, for example, attributing or imputing motives or intentions to someone's behaviour, is generally intended to convey opinions, and is thus more akin to value judgments (see Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 50, ECHR 1999-VIII).
  • EGMR, 27.11.2018 - 28482/13

    HERMAN-BISCHOFF c. ALLEMAGNE

    Juni 2017, Stojanovic ./. Kroatien, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 23160/09, Rdnr. 39, 19.
  • EGMR, 20.02.2024 - 14692/18

    VUGDELIJA v. CROATIA

    The remainder of the applicant's claim for costs and expenses incurred before the domestic courts must be rejected, given that he will be able to have them reimbursed should the proceedings complained of be reopened (see, for example, Stojanovic v. Croatia, no. 23160/09, § 84, 19 September 2013).
  • EGMR, 05.05.2022 - 19362/18

    MESIC v. CROATIA

    In the light of its above finding that the applicant may rely on Article 10 of the Convention in the present case (see paragraphs 33-34 above), and having regard to its case-law (see, for example, Stojanovic v. Croatia, no. 23160/09, § 56, 19 September 2013), the Court finds that the judgment in question constituted an interference with the applicant's right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by Article 10 § 1 of the Convention.
  • EGMR, 27.07.2021 - 29856/13

    SIC - SOCIEDADE INDEPENDENTE DE COMUNICAÇÃO v. PORTUGAL

    If national law does not allow - or allows only partial - reparation to be made, Article 41 empowers the Court to afford the injured party such satisfaction as appears to it to be appropriate (see Iatridis v. Greece (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 31107/96, §§ 32-33, ECHR 2000-XI, and Stojanovic v. Croatia, no. 23160/09, § 80, 19 September 2013).
  • EGMR, 26.09.2023 - 16087/18

    JELCIC STEPINAC v. CROATIA

    That claim must be rejected given that the applicant will be able to have those costs and expenses reimbursed should the third set of civil proceedings be reopened (see, for example, Stojanovic v. Croatia, no. 23160/09, § 84, 19 September 2013).
  • EGMR, 02.06.2022 - 12261/15

    CROATIA BUS D.O.O. v. CROATIA

    As regards the remainder of the claim for costs and expenses incurred before the domestic courts, the Court is of the opinion that it must be rejected, given that the applicant company will be able to have those costs reimbursed should the proceedings complained of be reopened (see, for example Stojanovic v. Croatia, no. 23160/09, § 84, 19 September 2013).
  • EGMR, 17.03.2022 - 29525/15

    PERO MARIC v. CROATIA

    The remainder of the applicant's claim for costs and expenses incurred before the domestic courts must be rejected, given that he will be able to have them reimbursed should the proceedings complained of be reopened (see, for example, Stojanovic v. Croatia, no. 23160/09, § 84, 19 September 2013).
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