Source: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=EGMR&Datum=30.09.2010&Aktenzeichen=28369/07
Timestamp: 2019-06-26 19:24:25
Document Index: 276218883

Matched Legal Cases: ['EGMR', 'EGMR', 'EGMR', 'EGMR', 'Art. 9', 'Art. 10', 'Art. 14', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 14', '§ 68', '§ 68', '§ 28', 'EGMR', '§ 28', '§ 75', 'EGMR', '§ 68', 'EGMR', 'EGMR', 'EGMR', 'EGMR', 'EGMR']

EGMR, 30.09.2010 - 28369/07 - dejure.org
https://dejure.org/2010,60512
EGMR, 30.09.2010 - 28369/07 (https://dejure.org/2010,60512)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 30.09.2010 - 28369/07 (https://dejure.org/2010,60512)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 30. September 2010 - 28369/07 (https://dejure.org/2010,60512)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2010,60512) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Art. 9, Art. 10, Art. 14, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 14+10 MRK
Diese Feststellung wird auch dadurch bestätigt, dass die Beschwerdeführerin, nachdem sie zu dem Schluss gekommen war, dass eine externe Offenlegung notwendig sei, sich nicht sofort an die Medien wandte oder Flugblätter verteilte, um eine maximale öffentliche Aufmerksamkeit zu erreichen, sondern sich zunächst an die Strafverfolgungsbehörden wandte, um Ermittlungen zu veranlassen (siehe im Gegensatz dazu, Balenovic ./. Kroatien, (Entsch.), Individualbeschwerde Nr. 28369/07, 30. September 2010).
Noting the importance of this principle, the Court reiterates that a breach of the rule of confidentiality might justify the conclusion that an application is inadmissible on the grounds of abuse of the right of application (see MiroÄ¼ubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 68, 15 September 2009, and Balenovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 28369/07, 30 September 2010).
Noting the importance of this principle, the Court further reiterates that it cannot be ruled out that a breach of the rule of confidentiality might, in certain circumstances, justify the conclusion that an application is inadmissible on the grounds of an abuse of the right of application (see MiroÄ¼ubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 68, 15 September 2009; Lesnina Veletrgovina d.o.o. v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 37619/04, 2 March 2010; and Balenovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 28369/07, 30 September 2010).
This rule is absolute and does not allow for an individual assessment of how much detail was disclosed (see Balenovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 28369/07, 30 September 2010 and Abbasov and Others v. Azerbaijan (dec.), no. 36609/08, § 28, 28 May 2013).
EGMR, 06.04.2017 - 2000/09
The Court reiterates that the rule of confidentiality is absolute and does not allow for individual assessment of how much detail has been disclosed (see Abbasov and Others, cited above, § 28; Balenovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 28369/07, 30 September 2010; and Lesnina Veletrgovina d.o.o. v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 37619/04, 2 March 2010).
La Cour rappelle que quiconque exerce sa liberté d'expression assume «des devoirs et des responsabilités» dont l'étendue dépend de sa situation, de la teneur et de l'authenticité des informations dévoilées au public, des circonstances dans lesquels les propos litigieux ont été tenus, ainsi que du procédé technique utilisé (Balenovic c. Croatie (déc.), no 28369/07, 30 septembre 2010, et Di Giovanni, précité, § 75).
EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 30206/06
ARSOVSKI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
Noting the importance of this principle, the Court further reiterates that it cannot be ruled out that a breach of the rule of confidentiality might, in certain circumstances, justify the conclusion that an application is inadmissible on the ground of an abuse of the right of application (see MiroÄ¼ubovs and Others v. Latvia, no. 798/05, § 68, 15 September 2009; Lesnina Veletrgovina d.o.o. v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 37619/04, 2 March 2010; and Balenovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 28369/07, 30 September 2010).
EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 47447/08
DECEUNINCK c. FRANCE
Cette règle de confidentialité revêt un caractère absolu et exclut une appréciation au cas par cas de la quantité d'informations divulguées (Balenovic c. Croatie (déc.), no 28369/07, 30 septembre 2010, et Lesnina Veletrgovina d.o.o. c. l'ex-République Yougoslave de Macédoine (déc.), no 37619/04, 2 mars 2010).
That interference had also been "necessary in a democratic society", having regard to the criteria established in the Court's case-law (the Government cited Heinisch v. Germany, no. 28274/08, ECHR 2011 (extracts), and Balenovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 28369/07, 30 September 2010), that is:.
EGMR, 28.05.2013 - 36609/08
ABBASOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN
This rule is absolute and does not allow for an individual assessment of how much detail was disclosed (see Balenovic v. Croatia (dec.), no. 28369/07, 30 September 2010, and Lesnina Veletrgovina d.o.o. v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 37619/04, 2 March 2010).
EGMR, 02.09.2014 - 57990/10
GORGADZE v. GEORGIA
EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 24697/09
EGMR, 16.06.2015 - 59472/11
KOPYTOWSKI c. POLOGNE