|EGMR, 03.10.2017 - 45083/06|
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,36866) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
NOVAYA GAZETA AND MILASHINA v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression) (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (3)
- EGMR, 11.05.2021 - 44561/11
RID NOVAYA GAZETA AND ZAO NOVAYA GAZETA v. RUSSIAThis could include situations where a journalist does not act in good faith in accordance with the ethics of journalism and with the diligence expected in responsible journalism dealing with a matter of public interest (see Novaya Gazeta and Milashina v. Russia, no. 45083/06, § 72, 3 October 2017).
- EGMR, 08.09.2020 - 46232/10
TIMAKOV AND OOO ID RUBEZH v. RUSSIAThe Court will examine the issue of whether the interference was "necessary in a democratic society" in the light of the relevant principles developed in its case-law that were summarised, in particular, in Novaya Gazeta and Milashina v. Russia (no. 45083/06, §§ 55-57, 3 October 2017).
- EGMR, 27.10.2020 - 16558/18
KILIÇDAROGLU v. TURKEYThe Court's assessment Whether there has been an interference 36. The Court is of the view that the award made by the Ankara District Court in its decisions of 23 October 2012, in which it acknowledged the applicant's liability for impugning the reputation of the plaintiff in the domestic proceedings (the then Prime Minister) and ordered him, pursuant to Articles 24 and 25 of the Civil Code, to pay a certain sum in respect of the non-pecuniary damage thus caused, can be regarded as an interference with the applicant's right to freedom of expression protected by the first paragraph of Article 10 of the Convention (see Med?¾lis Islamske Zajednice Brcko and Others v. Bosnia-Herzegovina [GC], no. 17224/11, § 66, ECHR 2017; Novaya Gazeta and Milashina v. Russia, no. 45083/06, § 53, 3 October 2017; Verlagsgruppe Droemer Knaur GmbH & Co. KG v. Germany, no. 35030/13, § 36, 19 October 2017; and Falzon v. Malta, no. 45791/13, § 50, 20 March 2018).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.