Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SIRYK v. UKRAINE

  Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 34, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 2 MRK
  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (victim) Violation of Art. 10 (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 31.03.2011 - 6428/07
• EGMR, 03.02.2021 - 6428/07

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 26.04.1979 - 6538/74

  SUNDAY TIMES c. ROYAUME-UNI (N° 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2011 - 6428/07

  While these considerations alone may serve as a basis for finding a violation of Article 10 of the Convention, the Court notes that there are certain elements of the case requiring it to continue the examination of the case and to turn to the question whether the interference pursued one or more legitimate aims and was "necessary in a democratic society" (see Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1), 26 April 1979, § 62, Series A no. 30).
• EGMR, 12.02.2008 - 21906/04

  KAFKARIS c. CHYPRE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2011 - 6428/07

  The notion of foreseeability applies not only to conduct of which an applicant should be reasonably able to foresee the consequences, but also to the "formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties" which may be attached to such conduct if it is found to be in breach of the national laws (see, mutatis mutandis, Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC], no. 21906/04, § 140, ECHR 2008-...).
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2011 - 6428/07

  The Court reiterates that its task in exercising its supervisory function under Article 10 of the Convention is to look at the interference complained of in the light of the case as a whole and, in particular, to determine whether the reasons adduced by the national authorities to justify it are relevant and sufficient (see, among many other authorities, Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 45, ECHR 1999-I).

 
• EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02

  LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2011 - 6428/07

  In particular, a norm cannot be regarded as a "law" unless it is formulated with sufficient precision to enable the citizen to regulate his conduct: he must be able - if need be with appropriate advice - to foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action may entail (see, for example, Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 41, ECHR 2007-XI).
• EGMR, 28.03.1990 - 10890/84

  GROPPERA RADIO AG ET AUTRES c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2011 - 6428/07

  The degree of precision depends to a considerable extent on the content of the instrument at issue, the field it is designed to cover, and the number and status of those to whom it is addressed (see Groppera Radio AG and Others v. Switzerland, 28 March 1990, § 68, Series A no. 173).
• EGMR, 22.04.1992 - 12351/86

  VIDAL c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2011 - 6428/07

  As the domestic courts are best placed for interpreting and applying rules of substantive and procedural law (see, among many authorities, Vidal v. Belgium, 22 April 1992, § 32, Series A no. 235-B), the question of the application of the relevant provisions of the Civil Code of 2003 in the light of the Constitutional Court's judgment was to be determined by the national courts dealing with the applicant's case.
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 25716/94

  JANOWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2011 - 6428/07

  In this connection, the Court has observed in several cases that it may be necessary to protect public servants from offensive, abusive and defamatory attacks which are calculated to affect them in the performance of their duties and to damage public confidence in them and the office they hold (see Janowski v. Poland [GC], no. 25716/94, § 33, ECHR 1999-I).