17.05.2014 Views

INFORMATION NOTE No. 30 on the case-law of the Court May 2001

INFORMATION NOTE No. 30 on the case-law of the Court May 2001

INFORMATION NOTE No. 30 on the case-law of the Court May 2001

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

(See Appendix I).<br />

FREEDOM TO IMPART <str<strong>on</strong>g>INFORMATION</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Injuncti<strong>on</strong> preventing newspaper from publishing pictures <strong>of</strong> a pers<strong>on</strong> al<strong>on</strong>g with articles<br />

in which allegati<strong>on</strong>s are made against him: admissible.<br />

KRONE VERLAGS GmbH & CoKG -. Austria (N° 34315/96)<br />

Decisi<strong>on</strong> 15.5.<strong>2001</strong> [Secti<strong>on</strong> III]<br />

The applicant company owns and publishes a newspaper. On several occasi<strong>on</strong>s, it<br />

published articles <strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong> financial situati<strong>on</strong> <strong>of</strong> P. who was at <strong>the</strong> same time both a teacher<br />

and a member <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> European Parliament. The articles c<strong>on</strong>tained, inter alia, allegati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

whereby he received a salary as a teacher although under domestic <strong>law</strong> he was not<br />

entitled to it whilst being a member <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> European Parliament. Photographs <strong>of</strong> P. were<br />

added to <strong>the</strong> impugned articles. At P.’s request, <strong>the</strong> Regi<strong>on</strong>al <strong>Court</strong> issued an injuncti<strong>on</strong><br />

prohibiting <strong>the</strong> publicati<strong>on</strong> <strong>of</strong> his picture toge<strong>the</strong>r with articles such as those that had been<br />

published. The court found that <strong>the</strong> P.’s interest in having prohibited <strong>the</strong> publicati<strong>on</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />

his photograph outweighed <strong>the</strong> applicant company’s interest in <strong>the</strong> publicati<strong>on</strong> <strong>of</strong> articles<br />

illustrated with his photograph. It held that <strong>the</strong> photographs had no specific informati<strong>on</strong><br />

value that could justify <strong>the</strong>ir publicati<strong>on</strong>. The appeal lodged by <strong>the</strong> applicant company<br />

was dismissed and its appeal <strong>on</strong> points <strong>of</strong> <strong>law</strong> was declared inadmissible by <strong>the</strong> Supreme<br />

<strong>Court</strong>.<br />

Admissible under Article 10.<br />

EFFECTIVE REMEDY<br />

ARTICLE 13<br />

Availability <strong>of</strong> effective remedies for Greek Cypriots in nor<strong>the</strong>rn Cyprus: violati<strong>on</strong>/no<br />

violati<strong>on</strong>.<br />

CYPRUS - Turkey (Nº 25781/94)<br />

Judgment 10.5.<strong>2001</strong> [Grand Chamber]<br />

(See Appendix I).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!