Tokens: 22
.
The
applicant
company
claimed
that
it
could
not
have
foreseen
that
the
Hungarian
courts
would
consider
hyperlinking
to
constitute
dissemination
.
Accordingly
,
the
applicant
company
could
not
have
foreseen
that
,
by
including
the
hyperlink
in
the
article
,
it
would
be
found
liable
for
defamation
and
ordered
to
remove
the
hyperlink
,
publish
excerpts
of
the
judgment
and
pay
legal
costs
.
The
Government
conceded
that
there
had
been
interference
with
the
applicant
company
’s
freedom
of
expression
,
but
argued
that
this
interference
had
been
lawful
and
proportionate
in
the
light
of
the
prevailing
doctrine
of
objective
liability
in
this
field
of
law
in
Hungary
.
Labels: O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O