Judgment Delfi AS v. Estonia - making an online news site liable for its readers’ comments was justified

CtEDO 2015-06-16 0,90

administration of the former by the applicant company was essentially of a mechanical and passive nature. The applicant company could not be considered the publisher of the comments, nor did it have any obligation to monitor them. 24. On 22

CtEDO 2011-02-11 0,89

disclaimer that it was not liable for the content of the comments. The County Court found that news article itself published in the Delfi news portal was a balanced one. A number of comments, however, were vulgar in their form; they were hu

CtEDO 2023-09-05 0,88

company. It found that – in accordance with section 16 of the E-Commerce Act – section 6 § 2.3a of the Media Act required media owners to delete statements without delay if they became aware that such statements fulfilled the offences refer

CtEDO 2022-03-01 0,88

of reputation of others in the Internet have been summarised in Delfi AS v. Estonia [GC], no. 64569/09, §§ 133, 136-161, ECHR 2015 and Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete and Index.hu Zrt v. Hungary, no. 22947/13, § 54-59, 2 February 201

CtEDO 2018-02-20 0,88

majority recalled that the relevant rules on redress for defamation (see paragraphs 21-22 below) had to be interpreted in conformity with the case-law of the Court and the Supreme Court. Reference was made to several cases, including Delfi