Source: http://echr.ketse.com/doc/14277.04-en-20080212/
Timestamp: 2018-03-19 22:29:22
Document Index: 208969446

Matched Legal Cases: ['art. 10', 'Art. 10', '§ 53', '§ 47', '§ 29', '§ 65', '§ 46', '§ 37', '§ 38', '§ 49', '§ 45', '§ 46', '§ 31', '§ 34', '§ 87', '§ 130', '§ 61', '§ 53', '§ 60', '§ 41', 'Art. 10', 'Art. 10', 'Art. 10', 'Art. 10', 'Art. 10', 'art. 10', 'art. 10']

GUJA v. MOLDOVA / ECHR
GUJA v. MOLDOVA View
AppNr 14277/04
Articles 10; 29-3; 41
Citations 6-11013P1-110
Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (global)
Preliminary objection dismissed (applicability)
(art. 10-2) preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence
Application Number 14277/04
Represented by GRIBINCEA V. ; ZAMA V.
Date of Judgment 12/02/2008
Applicability Article 10 applicable
Conclusion Preliminary objection dismissed (applicability) ; Violation of Art. 10; Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (global)
Articles 10 , 29-3 , 41
Law at Issue Article 263 of the Labour Code ; Internal Regulations of the Press Department of the Prosecutor General's Office ; Article 190 of the Criminal Code ; Articles 90 and 122 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ; Article 125 of the Constitution ; Sections 3 and 13 of the Prosecuting Authorities' Act ; Petitions Act ; Sections 22 and 23 of the Status of Members of Parliament Act
Strasbourg Case Law Ahmed and Others v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 2 September 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VI, §§ 53, 55 and 56 ; Amihalachioaie v. Moldova, no. 60115/00, § 47, ECHR 2004-III ; Barfod v. Denmark, judgment of 22 February 1989, Series A no. 149, § 29 ; Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 65, ECHR 1999-III ; Castells v. Spain, judgment of 23 April 1992, Series A no. 236, § 46 ; De Diego Nafría v. Spain, no. 46833/99, § 37, 14 March 2002 ; Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, ECHR 1999-I ; Fuentes Bobo v. Spain, no. 39293/98, § 38 and § 49, 29 February 2000 ; Hadjianastassiou v. Greece, judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 252, § 45 ; Haseldine v. the United Kingdom, no. 18957/91, Commission decision of 13 May 1992, Decisions and Reports (DR) 73 ; Hertel v. Switzerland, judgment of 25 August 1998, Reports 1998-VI, pp. 2329-30, § 46 ; Jersild v. Denmark, judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 298, p. 23, § 31 ; Morissens v. Belgium, no. 11389/85, Commission decision of 3 May 1988, DR 56, p. 127 ; Prager and Oberschlick v. Austria, judgment of 26 April 1995, Series A no. 313, § 34 ; Radio Twist, A.S. v. Slovakia, no. 62202/00, ECHR 2006 ; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 87, ECHR 2005-II ; Stoll v. Switzerland ([GC], no. 69698/01, § 130, 10 December 2007 ; Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, § 61, ECHR 1999-IV ; Vogt v. Germany, judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 323, § 53 and § 60 ; Wille v. Liechtenstein [GC], no. 28396/95, § 41, ECHR 1999-VII
External Sources 2004 report of the International Commission of Jurists on the rule of law in Moldova ; 2003 Freedom House report on Moldova ; 2003 Report by Open Society Justice Initiative and Freedom House Moldova ; Termination of Employment Convention no. 158 of the International Labour Organisation ; UN Convention against Corruption ; Council of Europe's Criminal Law Convention on Corruption of 27 January 1999 ; Council of Europe's Civil Law Convention on Corruption of 4 November 1999 ; Recommendation on Codes of Conduct for Public Officials adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 11 May 2000 (Rec (2000) 10)
Keywords "(Art. 10-1) FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION" "(Art. 10-1) FREEDOM TO IMPART INFORMATION" "(Art. 10-2) NECESSARY IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY" "(Art. 10-2) PRESCRIBED BY LAW" "(Art. 10-2) PREVENTING THE DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION RECEIVED IN CONFIDENCE" "MARGIN OF APPRECIATION" PROPORTIONALITY
10, 13 Court (Grand Chamber) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
MORISSENS v. BELGIQUE
6 (art. 10-2) protection of the reputation of others
2 (art. 10-2) maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary