CtEDO 15.12.2022 RO

Judgment Peradze and Others v. Georgia - Obscene slogan alone was no reason to stop people from demonstrating against urban development project

HOTĂRÂRE

15.12.2022

RĂSFOIEȘTE: CtEDO · 2022
DESCARCĂ: PDF · DOCX 🔒 Pro

Citează această cauză

Judgment Peradze and Others v. Georgia - Obscene slogan alone was no reason to stop people from demonstrating against urban development project (CtEDO, 2022)

Textul complet nu este disponibil. Consultați sursa originală.

§ Cauze similare

Grupate prin similitudine semantică

5 cauze

CtEDO 2016-09-14

0,89

PERADZE AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

11. With respect to the episode concerning the banners, the court emphasised that the slogan contained a slang term which was a sheer obscenity, void of any political, cultural, educational or scientific value. Such vulgarity could not cont

CtEDO 2022-09-01

0,88

CASE OF MAKARASHVILI AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA - [Georgian Translation] legal summary by the Supreme Court of Georgia, Human Rights Centre of the Analytical Department

Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;No violation of Article 6 - Ri

CtEDO 2025-04-22

0,88

BRACHVELI v. GEORGIA and 1 other application

square, as defined under Article 166 of the Code of Administrative Offences, constituted a violation of their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, in breach of Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

CtEDO 2021-12-16

0,88

CASE OF WOMEN'S INITIATIVES SUPPORTING GROUP AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA - [Georgian Translation] legal summary by the Supreme Court of Georgia, Human Rights Centre of the Analytical Department

Violation of Article 14+3 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 14 - Discrimination) (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture;Effective investigation;Positive obligations);Violation of Article 14+3 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 14

CtEDO 2022-12-14

0,87

CASE OF AMIRIDZE AGAINST GEORGIA

awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2022)808 ); Having also examined the communications submitted by the Public Defender of Georgia (see documents DH-DD(2021)267 and DH-DD(2022)946 ); Considering, in view of the limited scope of the vi

Sursă