Case Law, Strasbourg: Axel Springer AG v Germany (No.2), The Politics of Article 10 – Alexia Bedat

23 07 2014

Was-verdient-er-wirklich-beim-Gas-Pip-2-The Fifth Section of the European Court of Human Rights forcefully reiterated the importance of freedom of expression in the political sphere in the case of Axel Springer AG v Germany (No.2) ([2014] ECHR 745)(French only). The Court held that the German courts had erred in finding that an article commenting on the circumstances in which the former Federal Chancellor of Germany had put an end to his term in office had overstepped the limits of journalistic freedom. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Criminal record check regime incompatible with Article 8 – Anita Davies

29 06 2014

cbr_2433751bOn 18 June 2014 the Supreme Court handed down judgment in R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 35. The case concerns the mechanism governing criminal records checks (‘CRCs’) and enhanced criminal record checks (‘ECRCs’), and what an applicant is required to disclose to a potential employer. As such, the case has important ramifications for both employers and job applicants. It is also the latest development in a long running saga concerning criminal record checks and an individual’s ability, and indeed right, to put the past behind them. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Stichting Ostade Blade v Netherlands, The limits of the concept of “journalistic source” – Hugh Tomlinson QC

22 06 2014

516_thumbIn the case of Stichting Ostade Blade v Netherlands (App 8406/06, 27 May 2014) the Third Section of the Court of Human Rights held that an Article 10 application by a Dutch magazine arising out of a police raid was inadmissible.   Read the rest of this entry »





Case Comment: Heesom v The Public Services Ombudsman for Wales, Freedom of Expression for Politicians  – Sara Mansoori

18 06 2014

PatrickHeesom-webThe appeal in the case of Heesom v Public Services Ombudsman for Wales ([2014] EWHC 1504 (Admin)) was brought by a former Welsh Councillor against his disqualification from being a member of a Council.  It raises the issue about the scope of and legitimate restrictions to a politician’s right of freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v France, A Hereditary Game of Thrones – Alexia Bedat

13 06 2014

????????????????????????????In the case of Courdec and Hachette Filipacchi v France the privacy rights of another member of Monaco’s ruling family were outweighed by the interests of the press: French court order found to have breached Paris-Match’s Article 10 by Strasbourg. Read the rest of this entry »





News: Strasbourg, Grand Chamber agrees to hear Article 10 cases of Pentikäinen and Perinçek

5 06 2014

Court of Human RightsThe European Court of Human Rights has announced that [pdf] the Grand Chamber Panel has agreed to refer the important Article 10 cases of Perinçek v. Switzerland and Pentikäinen v. Finland for hearing by the Grand Chamber. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Erdoğan v Turkey, Criticising Judges and the importance of academic freedom – Hugh Tomlinson QC and Dirk Voorhoof

30 05 2014

mustafa_erdoğan_510On 27 May 2014, the Second Section of the Court of Human Rights handed down a judgment in the case of Mustafa Erdoğan v Turkey vindicating academic freedom and, in particular, the freedom to criticise the judiciary.  There is also an important concurring opinion which contains some interesting general reflections on the nature of academic freedom and the reasons why it should be protected under Article 10. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Salumäki v. Finland, No violation of Article 10 in “defamatory headline” case – Hugh Tomlinson QC

27 05 2014

20140401iltasanomatetusivu20140431In the case of Salumäki v. Finland ([2014] ECHR 459) the Fourth Section of the Court of Human Rights held that a defamation decision did not violate Article 1o, despite the fact that all the facts in the article in question were true.  The article bore an defamatory “innuendo” meaning and applying the Axel Springer criteria, the Court found that the domestic courts had struck a fair balance between the competing interests at stake. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Brosa v Germany, Injunction banning political leaflet violated Article 10 – Ronan Ó Fathaigh and Dirk Voorhoof

23 05 2014

3219641In a victory for free expression, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that a court-imposed injunction banning a political activist from distributing leaflets targeting a political candidate violated Article 10 of the European Convention. In Brosa Germany ([2014] ECHR 432) criticised the German courts for refusing to hold that the leaflet was a fair comment on a matter of public interest, as the threshold for proving fair comment was “disproportionately high.” Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Mladina v Slovenia, Court expands expands tolerance for criticism of xenophobia to criticism of homophobia – Sander Steendam

18 05 2014

MladinaOn 17 April 2014, the European Court of Human Rights issued a judgement in the case of Mladina v. Slovenia. In this case, the Court further develops its case law on “public statements susceptible to criticism”. When assessing defamation cases, the Court has in the past found that authors of such statements should show greater resilience when offensive statements are in turn addressed to them. Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,719 other followers