ÎNAPOI LA REZULTATE CtEDO

Sursă originală

CtEDO 15.03.2022 RO

Judgment OOO Memo v. Russia - Civil defamation proceedings by State bodies should only be permitted exceptionally

HOTĂRÂRE

15.03.2022

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

Citează această cauză

Judgment OOO Memo v. Russia - Civil defamation proceedings by State bodies should only be permitted exceptionally (CtEDO, 2022)

Textul complet nu este disponibil. Consultați sursa originală.

§ Cauze similare

Grupate prin similitudine semantică

5 cauze

CtEDO 2024-05-16

CASE OF MÁRIA SOMOGYI v. HUNGARY

regional branch of the United Russia party (see Ostanina v. Russia, no. 22169/11, 17 April 2018), and by the executive body of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation (see Margulev v. Russia, no. 15449/09, § 45, 8 October 2019, and K

CtEDO 2015-06-26

OOO MEMO v. RUSSIA

statements. 3. Resolutions of the Plenary Supreme Court of Russia Resolution of the Plenary Supreme Court of Russia no. 11 of 18 August 1992 (amended on 25 April 1995 and in force at the material time) provided that, in order to be consider

CtEDO 2021-06-15

CASE OF STOLBUNOV AND MOO SPRAVEDLIVOST v. RUSSIA

’s reputation. 24. The applicants maintained their complaints. Admissibility 25. The Court notes that these complaints are neither manifestly ill ‐ founded nor inadmissible on any other grounds listed in Article 35 of the Convention. They m

CtEDO 2025-12-10

CASE OF DERDIN AGAINST UKRAINE

relevant and sufficient reasoning of court decisions in the civil defamation proceedings, was examined within the framework of the group of Myrskyy v. Ukraine, which was closed by Final Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)317 ; Having satisfied itself

CtEDO 2013-07-08

NOVAYA GAZETA AND MILASHINA v. RUSSIA

under Article 152 of the Civil Code since they are an expression of the defendant’s subjective opinion and views and cannot be checked for veracity (paragraph 9). COMPLAINT The applicants complain under Article 10 of the Convention that the

Sursă