Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BIRIUK v. LITHUANIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 34, Art. 41 MRK
  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (victim) Violation of Art. 8 Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

• Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte

  (englisch)

Kurzfassungen/Presse

• RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)

Wird zitiert von ... (18)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 17.03.2016 - 16313/10

  Veröffentlichung mehrerer Fotos der Kinder von Oliver Kahn

  En particulier, la Cour a déjà constaté qu'il existe différentes manières d'assurer le respect de la vie privée, notamment en ce qui concerne les questions de compensation pour dommage moral (Armonienė c. Lituanie, no 36919/02, §§ 46-47, 25 novembre 2008, et Biriuk c. Lituanie, no 23373/03, §§ 45-46, 25 novembre 2008 ; voir aussi, mutatis mutandis, Zavoloka c. Lettonie, no 58447/00, § 40, 7 juillet 2009).
• EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 4782/18

  Österreich verurteilt: Vorwürfe eines KZ-Überlebenden nicht geprüft

  However, such limits must not be such as to deprive the individual of his or her privacy and thereby empty the right of its effective content (see Biriuk v. Lithuania, no. 23373/03, § 45, 25 November 2008, and Armonienė v. Lithuania, no. 36919/02, § 46, 25 November 2008).
• EGMR, 09.03.2023 - 36345/16

  L.B. v. HUNGARY

  α) Le principe de la limitation des finalités (article 5 b) de la Convention sur la protection des données), selon lequel les données à caractère personnel ne peuvent faire l'objet d'un traitement que pour des finalités déterminées et ne sont pas utilisées de manière incompatible avec ces finalités (voir, par exemple, M.S. c. Suède, précité, § 42, Z c. Finlande, précité, § 110, et Biriuk c. Lituanie, no 23373/03, § 43, 25 novembre 2008).

• EGMR, 28.11.2023 - 18269/18

  W v. BULGARIA

  In the light of the applicant's social and family background, such a threat to her reputation can hardly be brushed off as innocuous (see, mutatis mutandis, Armonienė v. Lithuania, no. 36919/02, § 42, 25 November 2008, and Biriuk v. Lithuania, no. 23373/03, § 41, 25 November 2008).
• EGMR, 18.07.2023 - 44033/17

  D.H. AND OTHERS v. NORTH MACEDONIA

  In this connection, the Court notes that the protection of personal data, not least medical data, is of fundamental importance to a person's enjoyment of his or her right to respect for private and family life as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention (see Z v. Finland, 25 February 1997, § 95, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-I; see also, mutatis mutandis, Armonienė v. Lithuania, no. 36919/02, § 40, 25 November 2008, and Biriuk v. Lithuania, no. 23373/03, § 39, 25 November 2008).
• EGMR, 14.06.2022 - 70489/17

  BUTKEVICIUS v. LITHUANIA

  The Court also finds it plain that the conversation contained no elements related to the applicant's private life, such as questions relating to his health (see Biriuk v. Lithuania, no. 23373/03, § 39, 25 November 2008) or sexual life (see Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania, no. 41288/15, § 109, 14 January 2020), or similar matters, except for the question of reputation, which the Court will revert to below.
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 8619/09

  [ENG]

  The instant case was therefore different from the cases of Biriuk v. Lithuania (no. 23373/03, 25 November 2008) and Armonienė v. Lithuania (no. 36919/02, 25 November 2008), where the applicants had been ordinary people.
• EGMR, 15.09.2022 - 24867/13

  MARCHENKO v. UKRAINE

  [4] Z v. Finland, 25 February 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997, § 96; Kiyutin v. Russia, no. 2700/10, ECHR 2011, § 64; Armonienė v. Lithuania, no. 36919/02, 25 November 2008, § 40; Biriuk v. Lithuania, no. 23373/03, 25 November 2008, § 39; I. v. Finland, no. 20511/03, 17 July 2008, § 38; C.C. v. Spain, no. 1425/06, 6 October 2009, § 33; P.T. v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 1122/12, 26 May 2020, §§ 5-6, 26.
• EGMR, 27.02.2018 - 66490/09

  MOCKUTÄ- v. LITHUANIA

  The Court has also held that information about a person's sexual life (see Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, 22 October 1981, § 41, Series A no. 45; Biriuk v. Lithuania, no. 23373/03, § 34, 25 November 2008; Ion Cârstea v. Romania, no. 20531/06, § 33, 28 October 2014; Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary [GC], no. 18030/11, § 191, ECHR 2016) as well as moral integrity (see Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France [GC], no. 40454/07, § 83, ECHR 2015 (extracts)) falls under Article 8 of the Convention.
• EGMR, 17.07.2018 - 31221/15

  EINARSSON v. ICELAND

  However, such limits must not be such as to deprive the individual of his or her privacy and thereby empty the right of its effective content (see Biriuk v. Lithuania, no. 23373/03, § 45, 25 November 2008 and Armonienė v. Lithuania, no. 36919/02, § 46, 25 November 2008).
• EGMR, 08.11.2016 - 43579/09

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 7259/03

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 19.11.2013 - 45543/04

  [FRE]
• EGMR, 30.09.2010 - 12451/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 28.10.2014 - 20531/06

  ION CÂRSTEA v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 08.10.2024 - 17157/16

  STOYANOVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 20376/05

  VARAPNICKAITE-MAZYLIENE v. LITHUANIA
• EGMR, 14.09.2010 - 43829/07

  MULLER c. ALLEMAGNE