text stringlengths 332 3.61k | label int64 0 12 |
|---|---|
29. The applicant newspaper also considered that the wording of its article had been accurate and moderate. No information about the private life of V.S. had been discussed, and the information about allegations of his use of public funds had not been presented to the reader as an established fact. Moreover, the press... | 0 |
33. The applicant maintained that although it could be argued that some of the remarks published were statements of fact rather than value judgments, it was clear that this was not a sufficient reason for restricting her freedom of expression as a journalist under Article <mask> of the Convention. She had acted in goo... | 0 |
28. The applicant company complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the restrictions on its right to freedom of expression in its case had not been prescribed by law as the Penal Code provision applied had not defined adequately the scope of private life. Nor had the restrictions been necessary in a democ... | 0 |
24. The applicant company argued that the open letter of Mr Heller fell under the protection of Article <mask> of the Convention. It was part of a debate in the media concerning cultural and educational policy which included fundamental political aspects, included true statements of fact and value-judgments based on a... | 0 |
47. The Government argued that according to the Court’s case-law (they cited Mladina d.d. Ljubljana v. Slovenia, no. 20981/10, 17 April 2014) offensive language enjoyed the protection of Article <mask> of the Convention only if its purpose was stylistic, whereas that protection was excluded if the sole purpose of such... | 0 |
52. The applicant complained, under Article <mask> of the Convention, about the breach of her freedom of expression suffered due to her criminal conviction, the subsequent civil defamation judgment rendered against her, and, also, the way in which the latter was enforced domestically, causing her, as it did, extreme f... | 0 |
19. The Government agreed that in the present case the refusals to register the titles of periodicals amounted to an interference with the applicant's rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. As to the compatibility of this interference with the restrictions laid down by the second paragraph of that Article in t... | 0 |
43. The applicants complained about the Vienna Court of Appeal’s judgment of 13 December 2007 and the Supreme Court’s judgment of 26 March 2009 in the main proceedings under the Copyright Act. They asserted that the injunction prohibiting them from further publishing Mr Küchl’s picture in the context of specific state... | 0 |
63. The applicant complained that the real reason for her repatriation was the quarrel that she had had with the commander of Police Precinct no. 19, in violation of her right to freedom of expression guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention. Under Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention the applicant comp... | 0 |
22. The Government acknowledged that the finding against the applicant in defamation proceedings had constituted an interference with his freedom of expression. They maintained that the interference had been justified under paragraph 2 of Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, it had been based on foreseeabl... | 0 |
42. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention of a violation of their right to freedom of expression, on the ground that they had been ordered to pay damages for reporting on pending criminal proceedings which dealt with a matter of general interest. Their intention had not been to reveal any in... | 0 |
37. The applicant complained that the domestic courts failed to apply the case law of the Strasbourg Court concerning Article <mask> of the Convention, in particular the case of Lingens v. Austria (judgment of 8 July 1986, Series A no. 103), in the assessment of their value judgments. The applicant also complained tha... | 0 |
186. The applicant complained that the decisions of the CRTA finding that it had violated the provisions of Law 7(I)/1998 and the relevant regulations, and the imposition of a fine, constituted a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. First, the applicant submitted that the provisions of the above Law and regu... | 0 |
27. The applicant submitted that his trial, which had lasted for more than seven years and which had resulted in his being convicted under section 7(2) of Law no. 3713, had amounted to an interference with his right guaranteed under Article <mask> of the Convention. He also claimed that the interference in question ha... | 0 |
75. The applicant submitted that the refusal to publish a paid advertisement by Rzeczpospolita, which had subsequently been endorsed by the courts, had breached his right to freedom of expression guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention. His book concerned issues of public concern and interest, given that Gazeta... | 0 |
31. The Government agreed that Article <mask> of the Convention was applicable to the present case and that the criminal conviction of the applicants constituted an interference with their right to freedom of expression as prescribed under the second section of that Article. However, the Government submitted that the ... | 0 |
123. The applicant complained that his mandate as President of the Supreme Court had been terminated as a result of the views he had expressed publicly in his capacity as President of the Supreme Court and the National Council of Justice, concerning legislative reforms affecting the judiciary. He alleged that there ha... | 0 |
21. The applicants complained that the judgment against them did not meet a pressing social need and had therefore breached their right to freedom of expression. The fact that the case had not been initiated by the public prosecutor was proof of this, in their view. The applicants further claimed that the offending bo... | 0 |
14. The Government rejected this complaint as manifestly ill-founded. In his interview the prosecutor had not asserted that the applicant had been or would be found guilty. He had spoken only about the applicant’s complicity in the crimes. Article <mask> of the Convention guarantees the freedom of speech, and newspape... | 0 |
55. The Government argued that Article <mask> of the Convention was inapplicable in the present case because the applicant had not been punished by the domestic court for his ideas or the information which he had been imparting but for his behaviour. The content of the applicant’s statements had been, in the Governmen... | 0 |
64. The applicant argued that the purely formal notion of secrecy, on which Article 293 of the Criminal Code was based and which had been confirmed by the Federal Court, had adverse consequences for freedom of expression. According to that provision, the publishing by an official of any document, regardless of its con... | 0 |
51. The Government argued that the domestic courts’ decisions were intended to protect Mr and Mrs Aubrac from defamation in a case in which the damage to their reputation was considerable given the accusation of treachery that had been levelled against them. The decisions were thus aimed at “the protection of the repu... | 0 |
23. The applicant maintained that her conviction for criminal insult because of the article she had written and published in Politika on 7 September 2003 had been a clear interference with her right of freedom of expression guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention. She accepted that it was “in accordance with la... | 0 |
37. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the restrictions on their right to freedom of expression had not been prescribed by law and had not been necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the reputation or rights of others. The disclosure of B.'s pictures and the facts me... | 0 |
23. The applicant insisted that he had checked the accuracy of facts with a reasonable degree of care, as might be required from a journalist. He had obtained and submitted to the domestic courts medical reports noting Mr S.’s injuries, the records of the confessions made by Mr S. and Mr M. at the police station and c... | 0 |
33. The applicants, who are members of the executive committee of the trade union Nueva Alternativa Asamblearia (NAA), complained that they had been dismissed on account of the content of the union’s newsletter of March 2002. They claimed that the company P. had not verified their individual level of participation and... | 0 |
188. The applicant claimed that as a result of the premature termination of his mandate as President of the Supreme Court and the entry into force of retroactive legislation concerning the remuneration of his post (see paragraph 52 above), he had lost his salary as President, other benefits attached to that position a... | 0 |
33. The applicant submitted that he had been an active journalist for many years and had often participated in public debates on issues relating to the recent history of Poland. The radio debate from which the present case originated was one of a series of public discussions on a range of political issues, including l... | 0 |
29. The applicant submitted that the injunction issued by the Austrian courts was not necessary in a democratic society. In particular, the Austrian courts wrongly qualified the impugned statement as a statement of fact, when it was a political value judgment criticising the plaintiff in the injunction proceedings and... | 0 |
19. The applicant contested the submission that there had been relevant and sufficient grounds to justify the impugned interference with his rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. Mr Köck had entered the public arena as he had been commissioned as an expert by the regional government and had, furthermore, repe... | 0 |
47. The Government found it uncontested that the applicant’s conviction for defamation and the liability to pay damages had amounted to an interference with her right to freedom of expression under Article <mask> of the Convention. The impugned measures had had a basis in domestic law, namely in Article 12 of the Cons... | 0 |
57. The Government acknowledged that advertisements and other forms of commercial expression may fall within the scope of Article <mask> of the Convention. However, this provision was not applicable to the circumstances of the present case because it concerned a dispute between private parties, whereas the rights and ... | 0 |
52. The Government argued that section 10 of the 1981 Act, as applied in the applicants' case, was compatible with Article <mask> of the Convention. They further argued that the domestic courts were entitled to make the findings they did on the basis of the evidence and to take those findings into account in making th... | 0 |
26. The Government submitted that the interference had been necessary in a democratic society and thus compatible with Article 10 § 2. The disclosure of the identities of the former Chief Security Director and his deputy in an obvious manner had made them possible targets of terrorist attacks as it had been suggested ... | 0 |
69. The applicant was convicted for speech which, as the domestic courts adjudged, incited hatred and violence rather than being merely insulting (compare and contrast Janowski v. Poland [GC], no. 25716/94, § 32, ECHR 1999‑I) or defamatory (compare and contrast Bartnik v. Poland (dec.), no. 53628/10, § 28, 11 March 20... | 0 |
60. The applicants maintained that nor had the interference been “necessary in a democratic society”. The press had the right and obligation to distribute information and thoughts about all issues of public interest and concern. A journalist was entitled to the protection safeguarded by Article <mask> of the Conventio... | 0 |
67. The Government contested the applicability of Article <mask> of the Convention to the applicant NGO’s complaint and invited the Court to declare the application inadmissible as being incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention. In their view, Article 10 of the Convention covered only the fr... | 0 |
42. The applicant complained that the Supreme Court’s decision of 30 September 2011, rejecting her appeal against the judicial order requiring her to give evidence about her contacts with Mr X, had given rise to an unjustified interference with her right not to be compelled to disclose her journalistic sources as inhe... | 0 |
24. The Government relied in substance on the Contracting States’ margin of appreciation in the matter. They argued that the applicant’s statement had exceeded the limits of freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention. They endorsed the domestic courts’ arguments that the impugned statement... | 0 |
62. The Government submitted that the sums claimed in respect of pecuniary damage had been awarded to V.K. by the domestic courts as fair compensation for the non-pecuniary damage he had sustained, and that no award should be made to the applicants under the head of pecuniary damage. They further submitted that, in th... | 0 |
53. The applicant complained that the existence of Article 301 of the Turkish Criminal Code interfered with his right to freedom of expression. He maintained that the mere fact that an investigation could potentially be brought against him under this provision for his scholarly work on the Armenian issue caused him gr... | 0 |
16. The applicant complained that the measures of fining him and banning his interpellations infringed his right to freedom of expression under Article <mask> of the Convention, since they did not serve a legitimate aim and were disproportionate. He claimed that declaring interpellations inadmissible for the protectio... | 0 |
37. The Government noted that before the domestic courts, including the Constitutional Court, the applicant had maintained that he was not the author of the statements for which he had been ordered to pay damages, and that they had been made up by the journalist who had interviewed him. They therefore concluded that, ... | 0 |
30. The Government argued that the Commission’s refusal to provide anonymised paper copies of all decisions issued since 1 January 2000 could not be regarded as an interference with the applicant association’s rights under Article 10. According to the Court’s case-law, Article <mask> of the Convention prohibited Contr... | 0 |
35. The applicant also complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the restrictions on his right to freedom of expression had not been necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the reputation or rights of others. The disclosure of B.'s pictures and the facts mentioned in the articles had not f... | 0 |
42. The Government acknowledged that the applicant’s conviction for defamation constituted interference with his rights guaranteed under Article <mask> of the Convention. They maintained, however, that this interference was in accordance with the law, pursued a legitimate aim, namely the protection of Mrs P.’s reputat... | 0 |
25. The applicants complained that their freedom to receive information had been breached because the restrictions imposed on them either had not been prescribed by law or had been more far-reaching than necessary in a democratic society. Moreover, they claimed that the consequences – the eviction from their flat and ... | 0 |
21. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the criminal proceedings brought against him pursuant to section 7(2) of Law no. 3713, and his conviction under that section, had constituted a violation of his right to freedom of expression. He further complained under the same Article about th... | 0 |
46. The Government acknowledged that there had been an interference with the first applicant’s right to freedom of expression. They further submitted that that interference had been based on Article 484 of the Civil Code. The legitimate aim pursued by the authorities had been the protection of the reputation of others... | 0 |
70. The applicant company complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the ordinary courts had (i) incorrectly required its legal predecessor to prove the absolute truthfulness of the published information, (ii) failed to assess the situation under the established criteria, (iii) found arbitrarily against th... | 0 |
34. The Government submitted that the applicants could not claim to be victims of a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention, as the interference with their right to freedom of expression had been based on the decisions of the domestic courts. The applicants did not complain under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention ... | 0 |
53. The Government submitted that the interference with the applicant's freedom of expression was compatible with the provisions of the second paragraph of Article <mask> of the Convention. The Government pointed out that the interference in question was based on Article 8 § 2 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act and th... | 0 |
22. The Government argued that the Austrian courts' injunction did not constitute an interference with the applicant association's rights within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. They submitted in that regard that Article 10 did not protect artistic freedom as such but only provided protection to artist... | 0 |
35. The Government agreed that there had been an interference with the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention but regarded this interference as justified to pursue the legitimate aim of protecting the reputation or the rights of others and to prevent the dissemination of confidential information. Re... | 0 |
77. The Government submitted that the finding against the applicant in the defamation proceedings constituted a legitimate restriction of his rights guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, it pursued a legitimate aim, namely the protection of M.L.’s reputation, and had been based on provisions o... | 0 |
52. The applicant company complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the court proceedings had been unfair on account of the unlawful order that it offer apologies to the claimant. The Court notes that this complaint is not manifestly ill‑founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention. I... | 0 |
177. The applicant complained before the Chamber, under Article 13 taken in conjunction with Article <mask> of the Convention, that he had been deprived of an effective domestic remedy in relation to the premature termination of his mandate as President of the Supreme Court. The applicant did not explicitly raise this... | 0 |
18. The applicant submitted that his statements about a local politician were true. He reported on the criminal proceedings against the deputy mayor of Ostóda and expressed his opinions about him. The applicant complained that he had been found guilty for having made statements such as “stormy and lucrative career in ... | 0 |
31. The applicant also complained under Article <mask> of the Convention about the outcome of the proceedings. The Court observes in this connection that the impugned statement was not made by the applicant but by his political opponent. It follows that – the applicant’s own freedom of speech not having been at stake ... | 0 |
36. The Government in turn reiterated the above position in their observations before the Court, acknowledging that part of the applicant’s actions, namely his complaints to various authorities, were protected under Article <mask> of the Convention. However, they emphasised that the applicant’s conduct had also involv... | 0 |
53. The applicant drew attention to the chronology of the events and contended that the impugned email of 20 March 2010 had merely been used as a pretext to dismiss him and that the real reason for his dismissal was his persistent criticism of the University. He dismissed the Government’s argument that he had not been... | 0 |
30. The applicant complained, relying on Articles 6 and 10 of the Convention, about the defamation proceedings brought by judge B., alleging that the proceedings had been unfair, that his letter to the relevant authorities could not be regarded as disseminating defamatory information, and that the award in the case ha... | 0 |
183. The Government maintained that there had been no violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. First of all, they submitted that the interference complained of had been prescribed by law. It had been based on Law 7(I)/1998 and the relevant regulations. The relevant provisions were clear and their effects reasona... | 0 |
66. The applicant maintained his complaint. In particular, he submitted that he had been attacked because of articles he had written criticising the activities of the Ministry of Defence. He pointed out that the domestic authorities’ failure to investigate the attack on him had amounted to a violation of his right to ... | 0 |
32. The Government accepted that the decision complained of by the applicant constituted an interference with her rights guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention. Nevertheless, they argued that the interference was prescribed by law, namely by Articles 998-1000 of the Civil Code in force at the time. Furthermore... | 0 |
56. The applicants pointed out that the Government had not put forward any arguments showing that restrictions on freedom of expression had been necessary in the present case for a pressing social need or for any other reason. Neither had the District Court nor the Court of Appeal taken into account Article <mask> of ... | 0 |
21. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the restrictions on their right to freedom of expression had not been prescribed by law and had not been necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the reputation or rights of others. The disclosure of B.'s name had not fallen withi... | 0 |
54. The applicant complained that the decision of the Judiciary Qualification Board of Moscow to bar her from holding judicial office in view of her critical public statements was incompatible with the principles enshrined in Article <mask> of the Convention. She contended that judges, like other persons, enjoy the pr... | 0 |
40. The Government alleged that the applicant’s complaint did not fall under Article <mask> of the Convention as it essentially concerned an employment dispute as to whether the applicant’s dismissal had been lawful under domestic law; it therefore concerned a labour dispute of a private-law nature. They noted that th... | 0 |
21. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the Bryanskiy District Court's judgment of 31 May 2004, upheld on appeal by the Bryanskiy Regional Court on 1 July 2004, had violated his right to express his opinion protected by Article 10 of the Convention. He submitted that the domestic court... | 0 |
28. The applicants contested that the Austrian courts' judgments had been necessary in a democratic society. They contended that the impugned statements constituted value judgments which had a factual basis, namely the reasoning of the judgment concerned. This factual basis was also known to the readers because it had... | 0 |
30. The Government further argued that the domestic courts had duly balanced the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention and the plaintiff’s rights protected under Article 8. In that regard they relied, inter alia, on Keller v. Hungary (dec.), no. 33352/02, 4 April 2006; Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens a... | 0 |
99. The applicants reiterated that, compared to the Tolstoy Miloslavsky case, the present jury had even less guidance and the Supreme Court did not exercise a more stringent review. Accordingly, if the law in that case violated Article <mask> of the Convention, so did the domestic law at issue in the present case. The... | 0 |
56. The Government finally observed that by publishing the material concerning the telephone interceptions, the press exercised its right, guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention, to impart information to the public. It is true that the press should not overstep the bounds imposed by the protection of the reput... | 0 |
45. The applicants stressed that the content of the impugned article had mainly been political and that it had concerned the Finnish presidential election campaign. The article had aimed to have an impact on public discussion and the information contained in it had been of public interest. The journalists had acted in... | 0 |
43. The applicant further complained under Article 6 § 1 and Article <mask> of the Convention that the judgments of the domestic courts had been unfair and unfavourable. He further mentioned, with respect to the proceedings against Komsomolska Pravda, Argumenty i Fakti and Fakty i Kommentari that the domestic courts d... | 0 |
26. The applicants complained that the judgments given in the case were in breach of freedom of expression. In particular, they claimed that the amount awarded to the plaintiff as compensation for non-pecuniary damage was disproportionate and had had a chilling effect on the exercise of freedom of opinion. They relied... | 0 |
28. The applicant submitted that the refusals to register the titles of the periodicals, Germany – A thousand-year-old enemy of Poland and The Social and Political Monthly – A European Moral Tribunal by the Bielsko-Biała Regional Court and the Katowice Court of Appeal had undoubtedly violated Article <mask> of the Con... | 0 |
49. The Government argued that the present case differed crucially from the case Juppala v. Finland. In the latter case the applicant had clearly seen the child’s bruised body, she had acted in good faith and was thus entitled to use the reporting system without any potential “chilling effect” of a criminal prosecutio... | 0 |
63. The applicant considered that when examining the question of “necessity” it was necessary to take into account the role played by lawyers – the specificity of which the Court had highlighted in the context of Article <mask> of the Convention – as well as the importance of confidentiality in the practice of their p... | 0 |
18. The applicant company complained that its right to freedom of expression under Article <mask> of the Convention had been infringed by the Austrian courts' injunction in so far as it prohibited the comparison of sales prices of the Neue Kronenzeitung and the Salzburger Nachrichten without indicating the differences... | 0 |
29. The applicants contested that assertion. They contended that the second applicant had been subject to an order to pay compensation for something which had been written by her husband. Given the situation, one could not fail to consider that the freedom of expression of the first applicant encompassed that of his s... | 0 |
42. The Government contested the applicants’ arguments. They reiterated their argument that the applicants’ complaint was incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention. In their submission, the applicants could not be said to have been directly affected by the facts allegedly constituting the int... | 0 |
43. The Government noted that the contested article was published by the applicant company during the mayoral elections in which Mr Y. was one of the main candidates. Therefore, there had been an important public interest in holding fair elections. Furthermore, the domestic courts had been protecting the rights and re... | 0 |
18. The Government did not contest that there had been an interference with the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. However, they emphasised that paragraph 2 of that provision allowed the Contracting States to restrict this right in certain circumstances. According to the Court’s case-law, State... | 0 |
138. The applicant placed particular emphasis on the deficiencies of the reasoning adduced by the domestic authorities. Both parties have asked the Court to re-examine the proportionality of the “interference”, although they disagree about certain circumstances having significance for such an assessment. The Court, fo... | 0 |
39. The applicants also complained that the loss of their former jobs and the subsequent employment restrictions under Article 2 of the Act also breached Article <mask> of the Convention (which guarantees freedom of expression), and constituted discrimination in breach of Article 14 of the Convention. The Court observ... | 0 |
48. The applicant complained that there was an unjustified interference with his right to freedom of expression in that his right to impart information and ideas guaranteed by the Convention was undermined by his convictions for his role in the publication of all the above-mentioned books. He relied under Article <mas... | 0 |
39. The Government, after summarising the principles of the Court’s relevant case-law on Article <mask> of the Convention, pointed out that whilst the Court had established the right of the general public to receive information, it had also imposed on journalists an obligation of “good faith”, requiring that they prov... | 0 |
37. The Government further argued that the domestic courts had duly balanced the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention and the plaintiff’s rights protected under Article 8. They relied, inter alia, on Keller v. Hungary (dec.), no. 33352/02, 4 April 2006; Lindon, Otchakovsky‑Laurens and July v. Fran... | 0 |
40. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that her disciplinary dismissal, ostensibly on technical grounds, had in reality been a sanction for the way in which she had exposed corrupt practices during her radio show on 9 October 1998. She submitted that that dismissal had been unlawful, had n... | 0 |
10. The applicant complained that the disciplinary punishment imposed on him for using “Kürt Halk Önderi” (the leader of Kurdish people) when referring to the imprisoned leader of the PKK in his letter, had constituted an unjustified interference with his right to freedom of expression under Article <mask> of the Conv... | 0 |
146. The Government submitted that the applicant had not exhausted domestic remedies either expressly or in substance. The grounds of appeal that had been filed and subsequently argued by the applicant before the Supreme Court had not included any allegation of a violation of the provisions of Article <mask> of the Co... | 0 |
40. The applicants complained that the ban imposed by the governor on 1 December 1997 on the distribution of the daily newspaper Ülkede Gündem in the state of emergency region constituted an unjustified interference in the exercise of their right to impart information or ideas. They relied in that connection on Articl... | 0 |
35. The Government conceded that there was an interference with the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. However, they considered that this measure was lawful, having its basis in Article 124 of the Criminal Code, Article 47 of the Law on Information and Article 26 of the Printed Media Act and pu... | 0 |
71. The applicant complained that during his detention on remand his letters had been monitored by officials at the detention centre. He further complained that he had been punished for having sent a letter bypassing the detention centre’s official channels. In both cases the applicant relied on Article <mask> of the ... | 0 |
25. The applicants argued that the judgments given by the domestic courts had violated Article <mask> of the Convention. They were accused of defamation for having published critical articles about a local councillor in which they had exposed his reprehensible behaviour. Despite the fact that all of the information pr... | 0 |
102. The Government reiterated that the applicant, acting as a representative of another presidential candidate, had imparted false information about the death of the latter's rival. He had thus participated in a dishonest electoral campaign and had damaged the interests of Ukrainian society in having fair elections. ... | 0 |
31. The applicant’s conviction and sentence (see paragraphs 12 and 14 above) constituted an “interference”, in the form of a “penalty”, with his right to freedom of expression under Article <mask> of the Convention. Such interference will only be compatible with that Article if it was “prescribed by law” and was “nece... | 0 |
21. The applicant company alleged a violation of its right to freedom of expression. It submitted that the domestic courts' injunctions prohibiting it from distributing the book Le Grand Secret had not been prescribed by law, had not pursued a legitimate aim and had not been “necessary in a democratic society”; it fur... | 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.