Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MIKIASHVILI AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  MIKIASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (18)Zitiert selbst (8)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 26.03.2020 - 10090/16

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 18865/11

  In the present cases, the Court observes that the applicants, while having omitted to give reasons when requesting information from the administrative authorities, remedied their initial omission by providing the necessary arguments in the subsequent judicial proceedings (see paragraphs 11 and 17 above and compare Centre for Democracy and the Rule of Law v. Ukraine, no. 10090/16, §§ 13-19 and 97, 26 March 2020, and contrast Studio Monitori and Others, cited above, §§ 40 and 42).
• EGMR, 07.02.2017 - 63898/09

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 18865/11

  The Court observes that Article 10 of the Convention does not impose an obligation to collect information upon the applicant's request, particularly when, as in the present case, a considerable amount of work is involved (see Bubon v. Russia, no. 63898/09, §§ 44 and 45, 7 February 2017).
• EGMR, 03.03.2020 - 75865/11

  CENTRE FOR DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 18865/11

  It is in the first place before the relevant domestic authorities that the seeker of information must sufficiently explain the exact purpose of the request by specifying, inter alia, how his or her particular role in receiving and imparting information to the public is compatible with the nature of the information sought and why access to it is instrumental for the exercise of his or her relevant right to freedom of expression (compare Centre for Democracy and the Rule of Law v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 75865/11, §§ 51, 54 and 57-62, 3 March 2020).

• EGMR, 29.08.2017 - 16393/14

  SIOUTIS c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 18865/11

  Admittedly, a matter which is capable of giving rise to a considerable controversy might also meet a public-interest test (see Sioutis v. Greece (dec.), no. 16393/14, § 28, 29 August 2017), and in this regard the Court notes the first applicant's claim that at the material time rumours were being actively spread by the victim's family that the convicted person had in actual fact either been murdered in prison or been given safe passage out of the country by the authorities (see paragraph 40 above).
• EGMR, 08.11.2016 - 18030/11

  MAGYAR HELSINKI BIZOTTSÁG v. HUNGARY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 18865/11

  Emphasising in this connection the principle in the Court's case-law that the question whether, and if so to what extent, the denial of access to information constituted an interference with an applicant's freedom of expression had to be assessed in each individual case and in the light of its particular circumstances (she referred to Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary [GC], no. 18030/11, § 172, 8 November 2016), she added that the information of interest to her had existed in a ready and available form, and that its disclosure would not therefore have placed any high burden on the relevant authorities (she also referred to Társaság a Szabadságjogokért v. Hungary, no. 37374/05, § 36, 14 April 2009).
• EGMR, 25.09.2018 - 76639/11

  Denisov v. Ukraine

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 18865/11

  The Court reiterates that the question of the applicability of a Convention right pertains to the Court's jurisdiction ratione materiae and the relevant analysis should normally be carried out at the admissibility stage unless there is a particular reason to join this question to the merits (see Denisov v. Ukraine [GC], no. 76639/11, § 93, 25 September 2018, and Studio Monitori and Others v. Georgia, nos.
• EGMR, 30.01.2020 - 44920/09

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 18865/11

  44920/09 and 8942/10, § 32, 30 January 2020).
• EGMR, 24.06.2014 - 27329/06

  ROSIIANU c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 19.01.2021 - 18865/11

  Applying the above-mentioned four-criteria test developed in Magyar Helsinki Bizottság (cited above), the Court notes, firstly, that the journalistic role of all the applicants was undeniably compatible with the scope of the right to solicit access to State-held information (compare, for instance, Roşiianu v. Romania, no. 27329/06, § 61, 24 June 2014).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 08.11.2022 - 8819/16

  SAURE v. GERMANY

  18865/11 and 51865/11, §§ 50-51, 19 January 2021; Georgian Young Lawyers' Association v. Georgia (dec.), no. 2703/12, §§ 29-30, 19 January 2021; Centre for Democracy and the Rule of Law (dec.), no. 75865/11, § 54, 3 March 2020; Centre for Democracy and the Rule of Law, cited above, §§ 97 and 119; and Studio Monitori and Others, cited above, §§ 40 and 42).
• EGMR, 28.03.2023 - 6091/16

  Auskunftsausspruch: Namen von Stasi-Richtern müssen nicht offengelegt werden

  18865/11 and 51865/11, § 49, 19 January 2021; and Saure [no. 6106/16], § 35, all cited above).
• EGMR, 19.10.2021 - 6106/16

  SAURE v. GERMANY

  18865/11 and 51865/11, §§ 51-56, 19 January 2021; and Bubon v. Russia, no. 63898/09, §§ 39-45, 7 February 2017).

• EGMR, 21.03.2024 - 10103/20

  SIEC OBYWATELSKA WATCHDOG POLSKA v. POLAND

  18865/11 and 51865/11, §§ 51-56, 19 January 2021; and Bubon v. Russia, no. 63898/09, §§ 39-45, 7 February 2017).
• EGMR, 04.03.2025 - 4326/18

  GIRGINOVA v. BULGARIA

  18865/11 and 51865/11, § 51, 19 January 2021).
• EGMR, 28.02.2023 - 80857/17

  MITOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  18865/11 and 51865/11, § 47, 19 January 2021; Georgian Young Lawyers' Association v. Georgia (dec.), no. 2703/12, § 30, 19 January 2021; Yuriy Chumak v. Ukraine, no. 23897/10, § 28, 18 March 2021; Association Burestop 55 and Others v. France, nos.
• EGMR, 04.04.2024 - 49049/18

  ZÖLDI v. HUNGARY

  18865/11 and 51865/11, § 49, 19 January 2021; and Saure v. Germany (dec.), no. 6106/16, § 35, 19 October 2021).
• EGMR, 07.06.2022 - 28203/10

  NAMAZLI v. AZERBAIJAN

  18865/11 and 51865/11, § 50, 19 January 2021, with further references).
• EGMR - 22685/17 (anhängig)

  IRAVUNKI YEVROPA MIAVORUM v. ARMENIA and 1 other application

  18865/11 and 51865/11, §§ 47-56, 19 January 2021)?.
• EGMR, 17.10.2023 - 48460/11

  THE PUBLIC UNION FOR ASSISTANCE IN ECONOMIC INITIATIVES v. AZERBAIJAN

  18865/11 and 51865/11, § 55, 19 January 2021).
• EGMR, 25.03.2021 - 49071/12

  DIASAMIDZE AND BATUMELEBI v. GEORGIA and 1 other application
• EGMR, 29.08.2024 - 33394/12

  THE MEDIA RIGHTS INSTITUTE v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 18.04.2024 - 51010/13

  ROMANENKO v. UKRAINE
• EGMR, 13.12.2022 - 42845/10

  MEHTIYEV and 10 other applications v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 11.07.2023 - 27790/18

  ASSOCIATION GONG v. CROATIA
• EGMR, 10.01.2023 - 8135/12

  AGALIYEV v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 25.06.2024 - 12759/13

  PUBLIC ASSOCIATION FOR ASSISTANCE TO A FREE ECONOMY v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 07.05.2024 - 7211/12

  THE ORGANISATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF OIL WORKERS' RIGHTS v. AZERBAIJAN