Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KITA v. POLAND

  (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00
• EGMR, 02.12.2011 - 57659/00

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (8)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 04.04.2006 - 33352/02

  KELLER v. HUNGARY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00

  As regards the reasons adduced by the domestic courts to justify the interference the Court observes that they have failed to recognise that the present case involved a conflict between the right to freedom of expression and the protection of the reputation and the rights of others and so did not carry out the relevant balancing exercise (see, mutatis mutandis, Keller v. Hungary (dec.), no. 33352/02, 4 April 2006).
• EGMR, 15.02.2005 - 68416/01

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00

  The Court also notes that the nature and severity of the penalty imposed, as well as the "relevance" and "sufficiency" of the national courts" reasoning, are matters of particular relevance in assessing the proportionality of the interference under Article 10 § 2 (Pakdemirli v. Turkey, no. 35839/97, § 32, 22 February 2005; and Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 87, ECHR 2005-II).
• EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00

  The Court has also repeatedly upheld the right to impart, in good faith, information on matters of public interest, even where this involved damaging statements about private individuals (see, mutatis mutandis, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, ECHR 1999-III), and has emphasised that the limits of acceptable criticism are still wider where the target is a politician (see Feldek v. Slovakia, no. 29032/95, § 74, ECHR 2001-VIII).

• EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 29032/95

  Feldek ./. Slowakei

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00

  The Court has also repeatedly upheld the right to impart, in good faith, information on matters of public interest, even where this involved damaging statements about private individuals (see, mutatis mutandis, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, ECHR 1999-III), and has emphasised that the limits of acceptable criticism are still wider where the target is a politician (see Feldek v. Slovakia, no. 29032/95, § 74, ECHR 2001-VIII).
• EGMR, 25.11.1999 - 23118/93

  NILSEN AND JOHNSEN v. NORWAY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00

  As set out in Article 10, this freedom is subject to exceptions, which must however be interpreted strictly, and the need for any restrictions must be established convincingly (see, among many other authorities, Janowski v. Poland [GC], no. 25716/94, § 30 ECHR 1999-I, and Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 43, ECHR 1999-VIII).
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 25716/94

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00

  As set out in Article 10, this freedom is subject to exceptions, which must however be interpreted strictly, and the need for any restrictions must be established convincingly (see, among many other authorities, Janowski v. Poland [GC], no. 25716/94, § 30 ECHR 1999-I, and Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway [GC], no. 23118/93, § 43, ECHR 1999-VIII).
• EGMR, 25.05.2004 - 1956/02

  ANDRET et AUTRES contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00

  On 7 November 2002 the Katowice Court of Appeal gave a decision in the case no. IACz 1956/02 in which it held:.
• EGMR, 20.11.2007 - 27935/05

  FILIPOVIC v. SERBIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.07.2008 - 57659/00

  The Court observes that account also has to be taken of whether the impugned expressions concerned the private life or behaviour of an individual acting in an official capacity (see Filipovic v. Serbia, no. 27935/05, § 55, 20 November 2007).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen