text stringlengths 332 3.61k | label int64 0 12 |
|---|---|
33. The applicant's lawyer submitted that the interference with the applicant's freedom of expression had been in breach of Article 10 § 2 of the Convention. She considered that the domestic courts had failed to take into account that the impugned statements had been made at a session of the City Council, in the cours... | 0 |
26. The Government submitted that the complaint was incompatible ratione materiae or manifestly ill-founded. They argued that the dispute in the case had been limited to the question of the actual positioning of the satellite dish, having regard, primarily, to contractual obligations. The alleged interference had not ... | 0 |
38. The applicant association concluded that there was no pressing need to prohibit the poster just because it mentioned a website address. Pointing out that Article <mask> of the Convention also protected the form in which ideas were conveyed (it cited Thoma v. Luxembourg, no. 38432/97, § 45, ECHR 2001‑III), and shar... | 0 |
45. The applicants then submitted that the interference had not been “prescribed by law” within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. Whilst recognising that domestic courts had a margin of appreciation as to whether the offending comments were defamatory or not, they complained, firstly, about the unforese... | 0 |
192. The applicant's complaint, as noted at paragraph 157 above, concerns the impact on it of a costs award which, under domestic law, included success fees calculated at almost twice most of the base costs of two appeals to the House of Lords. The Court considers, and it was not seriously disputed by the Government, ... | 0 |
71. The applicants submitted that the interference with their right to freedom of expression as a result of their conviction by the national courts had not met a “pressing social need” capable of justifying it under the second paragraph of Article <mask> of the Convention. They maintained, firstly, that by publishing ... | 0 |
51. The applicant did not deny that there had been a statutory basis for the interference under section 180 of the Criminal Procedure Law. She denounced the quality of the law and argued that the law should be both sufficiently accessible and foreseeable, that is, formulated with sufficient precision to enable an indi... | 0 |
28. The applicants submitted that the grounds for contesting the landlord's action had not been only their denial that the positioning of the satellite was in breach of the lease, but also that that action infringed their right to freedom of information under the Swedish Constitution and Article <mask> of the Conventi... | 0 |
25. The Government acknowledged the existence of an interference in the instant case but submitted that it was justified under the provisions of the second paragraph of Article <mask> of the Convention. The interference with the applicants’ right to freedom of expression had been based on Article 6 of Law no. 3713 as ... | 0 |
100. The Government argued that there had been no “interference by public authority” under Article <mask> of the Convention because at no point on 27 August 2009 or later had the applicant been found liable for any offence or otherwise; he had not been prohibited from publishing material; the material that had been co... | 0 |
30. The applicants further submitted that Article <mask> of the Convention protected not only the substance of the ideas and information expressed, but also the form in which they were conveyed. Journalistic freedom also covered possible recourse to a degree of exaggeration or even provocation. Freedom of expression a... | 0 |
37. The Government conceded that the denial of a broadcasting licence to Glas Nadezhda EOOD had amounted to an interference with the applicants' freedom to impart information and ideas. In their view, however, this interference had been authorised under the third sentence of paragraph 1 of Article <mask> of the Conven... | 0 |
19. The Government conceded that there had been interference with the applicants' rights, but that it was prescribed by law and sought to protect the reputation and rights of others. Furthermore, the interference had been necessary and proportionate within the meaning of paragraph 2 of Article <mask> of the Convention... | 0 |
54. The Government pointed out that, as part of their general policing powers, the administrative authorities had the power to order the seizure of French publications when they considered that they were liable to cause a serious threat to public order. The administrative authorities were empowered therefore to prohib... | 0 |
65. The Government maintained at the outset that there had been no interference with the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, because he had not experienced any negative effects in relation to the publication in Kauno Diena. They noted that the majority of cases examined by the Court under Article <mask> of the... | 0 |
39. The Government observed that cases like the present one, where an individual’s right directly opposes another right of another individual, have their special features. The Government referred in this respect to the subsidiarity principle. In their view, the impugned measures could be regarded as proportionate to t... | 0 |
19. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that her prosecution and subsequent conviction on account of a speech she had made during the Newroz celebrations had constituted an unjustified interference with her freedom of expression. She further alleged under Article 7 of the Convention that se... | 0 |
24. The applicant submitted that strict liability established by domestic law in cases of disseminating information damaging dignity, honour or reputation (see paragraph 18 above) was contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. In the applicant’s opinion a journalist was liable to pay compensation in respect of non-... | 0 |
66. The applicant submitted further that the refusal to allow the evidence of Mr Moule and Mr Walusimbi violated Article <mask> of the Convention. As a result of the refusal, his defence had failed and, ultimately, he had been bound by an injunction prohibiting repetition of allegations which he said were true. In the... | 0 |
36. The Government highlighted that the present case also engaged the Article 8 and Article 6 rights of G.L. In the choice between the single-publication rule and the Internet publication rule, these competing interests should be balanced. They pointed to the fact that there was no consistency of approach to this issu... | 0 |
39. The applicant complained that his criminal convictions for defamation had violated his rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. The Court will confine its examination to the complaints as submitted by the applicant in the application forms, which were communicated to the respondent Government and did not inc... | 0 |
73. The applicant further complained that the decision of the Migration Board and the judgment of the Federal Administrative Court infringed his rights under Article 2, Article 5 and Article <mask> of the Convention. He did not provide any specific arguments as to how the Swiss authorities had violated these rights an... | 0 |
22. The Government argued that the applicant’s expressions fell outside the scope of protection of Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, it had been established in the domestic proceedings that the applicant had intended to insult E.P., as proven by the fact that he had accompanied the diffusion of the true... | 0 |
82. The applicant disputed, in essence, that the domestic law applied in his case had met the criteria of foreseeability and accessibility, or, in other words, that his conviction had been “lawful” within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. In this connection, the Court notes firstly that, as it has alrea... | 0 |
28. The Government submitted that the applicant’s complaint had been thoroughly examined by the national courts, which had applied the law in force at the relevant time to the particular circumstances of the case. They emphasised the fact that in its judgment of 8 April 2005, the Craiova District Court had taken into ... | 0 |
39. The applicants alleged a violation of their right to peaceful assembly. They complained, in particular, about the disruptive security measures implemented at the site of the meeting at Bolotnaya Square, the early termination of the assembly and their arrest followed by their conviction for administrative offences.... | 1 |
27. The Government emphasised, firstly, that Turkish legislation, while granting public-sector employees the freedom to set up associations to defend their rights, did not guarantee trade-union freedom in the public sector, covering the rights to strike and to conduct collective bargaining. They noted, secondly, that ... | 1 |
62. The applicants furthermore maintained that physical force had been used against them by police, and that that force had not been necessary in a democratic society and had in any event been disproportionate to whatever legitimate aim the Government had claimed to be pursuing. While reiterating the Court’s reasoning... | 1 |
44. The applicants alleged that their conviction under Article 314 § 2 of the Criminal Code, on the basis of Articles 220 § 7 and 314 § 3 of the same Code, and section 7(2) of Law no. 3713 constituted an interference with their right to freedom of assembly. They stated that the interference in question was not prescri... | 1 |
96. The Government considered that neither Article 10 nor Article <mask> of the Convention had been breached. The interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression and freedom of assembly by their detention had been justified. It had been based on section 55(1), paragraph 2 (a), of the PSOA, a provision which ha... | 1 |
26. The applicant organisation complained that there had been an unlawful interference with its right to freedom of peaceful assembly, as provided in Article <mask> of the Convention, on account of the prohibition issued by the municipality of the public rally planned for 19 April 2000. It also complained of the lack ... | 1 |
12. The applicant complained that the disciplinary sanction that had been imposed on him for his participation in trade union activities, had amounted to disproportionate interference with his rights under the Convention. In this regard, he relied on Articles 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11 of the Convention and Article 2 of Pr... | 1 |
34. The applicants argued that by refusing to register Ilinden the authorities had infringed their rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. The refusal of the courts had been based on deliberately erroneous findings in respect of the relevant facts and a misconstruction of the applicable law. It was clear that f... | 1 |
56. The applicant union urged the Court to reject any narrow concept of trade-union freedom of association that would be limited to the protection of the strictly personal interests of individual workers. Such an interpretation would impoverish the substance of Article 11. In the many cases it had decided involving st... | 1 |
23. The Government stated that the meeting in issue had been organised unlawfully. They pointed out that the second paragraph of Article <mask> of the Convention imposes limits on the right of peaceful assembly in order to prevent disorder. In their view, the organisation of the Labour Day celebrations in Taksim would... | 1 |
237. The Government further noted that there was sufficient eyewitness and video evidence proving the violent intentions and violent actions of the demonstrators, as a result of which a number of police officers and civilians had been injured and a significant amount of public and private property had been damaged. On... | 1 |
102. The Government of Cyprus submitted that the applicant’s right to demonstrate under Article <mask> of the Convention had been interfered with in an aggravated and serious manner. The acts of the respondent Government were a deliberate and provocative attempt to disrupt a lawful demonstration in an area which was s... | 1 |
30. The applicants considered that the suspension of Tüm Haber Sen's activities and its dissolution constituted a violation of their rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. The Government argued that there had been no interference since, in their opinion, the domestic courts had penalised the applicant trade un... | 1 |
78. The applicant party contended that the interference with its right to freedom of association had not been “prescribed by law” within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. It stated that the interference in question was based principally on Article 69 § 3 of the Constitution, which provided that “the inc... | 1 |
37. The Government agreed that the refusal of the domestic courts to register the applicant association had amounted to an interference with its rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. The refusal had been lawful and had pursued a legitimate aim, namely that of the protection of the rights and freedoms of other... | 1 |
49. The Government submitted that the applicant had had effective domestic remedies at his disposal in respect of the alleged violation of Article <mask> of the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention. In particular, it was open to the applicant to lodge an acknowledgement claim under Article 68 of the... | 1 |
116. The Government of Cyprus submitted that the applicant's right to demonstrate under Article <mask> of the Convention had been interfered with in an aggravated and serious manner. The acts of the respondent Government were a deliberate and provocative attempt to disrupt a lawful demonstration in an area which was s... | 1 |
45. The applicants also complained, under Article <mask> of the Convention, that they had been forced to become co-owners of their company with persons with whom they did not want to be partners. The Court considers that they failed to substantiate their complaint, given that the domestic courts did not order them to ... | 1 |
21. The applicant complained that the failure by the Ministry of Justice to register the public association in a timely manner had constituted an interference with his freedom of association. As the Ministry evaded registering the organisation by significantly delaying the examination of the founders' registration req... | 1 |
201. The applicant argued that, where a person falls into a category of people who are at risk from unlawful violence from State officials on account of trade union activities, the issues under Article 2 and Article 11 need to be considered separately. She asked the Court to find a violation of Article <mask> of the C... | 1 |
80. The Government argued that there had been no interference with the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. The demonstration in which the applicant had taken part was not held in a permitted location and the measures taken by the national authorities had not furthered the aim of preventing the d... | 1 |
26. The Government submitted that the application should be rejected for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, as although the applicant had raised a claim under Article <mask> of the Convention in the EAT it did not press that submission at the oral hearing and accepted that the EAT should proceed to interpret section... | 1 |
105. The Government of Cyprus submitted that the applicant's right to demonstrate under Article <mask> of the Convention had been interfered with in an aggravated and serious manner. The acts of the respondent Government were a deliberate and provocative attempt to disrupt a lawful demonstration in an area which was s... | 1 |
53. The Government raised two objections to admissibility before the Grand Chamber: one to the effect that it was impossible to rely against them on international instruments other than the Convention, particularly instruments that Turkey had not ratified; and the other to the effect that Article <mask> of the Convent... | 1 |
22. The Government submitted that under Article <mask> of the Convention the right of assembly was not an absolute right and therefore could be subjected to restrictions. In Hungary, the possibility of interfering with that right was laid down in an Act of Parliament. The holding of certain assemblies and meetings on ... | 1 |
31. The applicants submitted that the authorities’ suggestion to change the venue of the “demonstration”, the forceful termination of the “demonstration”, their arrest and the fines imposed in the administrative proceedings constituted an interference with their right of peaceful assembly under Article <mask> of the C... | 1 |
31. The applicants complained of interference with their freedom of association on account of the acts directed against them, the participation of the clergy and municipal authorities in those acts, and the inactivity of the police when a group of demonstrators broke into and ransacked the party headquarters. They rel... | 1 |
232. The Government alleged in the present case that the demonstrators had been the first to attack the police, which proved that they had had violent intentions. The applicant, however, contested such an account of events, both before this Court and the domestic courts (see, by contrast, Primov and Others, cited abov... | 1 |
63. The applicants criticised the manner in which the Government had raised the question concerning interpretation of the Convention. They pointed out that the Chamber had not applied the above-mentioned provisions of the European Social Charter in the present case, but that it had taken into account, in its interpret... | 1 |
51. The applicants complained that their peaceful protests at the University over the period of 19-20 June and 3-4 July 2006 had been violently dispersed and that the prosecuting authorities had failed to initiate an investigation against the responsible authorities. They also denounced the imposition of administrativ... | 1 |
261. The applicant complained that the refusal by the Turkish and Turkish-Cypriot authorities to allow her to cross the “green line” in order to attend a meeting organised by a radio station in southern Cyprus had prevented her from exercising her right to freedom of assembly and assembly with Greek Cypriots in breach... | 1 |
117. The Government of Cyprus submitted that the applicant's right to demonstrate under Article <mask> of the Convention had been interfered with in an aggravated and serious manner. The acts of the respondent Government were a deliberate and provocative attempt to disrupt a lawful demonstration in an area which was s... | 1 |
160. The Government contended that the disorder at Bolotnaya Square had occurred when some of the organisers and participants had refused to follow the agreed plan, disregarded the police instructions to proceed to the designated venue at Bolotnaya embankment, and sat on the ground causing scuffles and disorder. The i... | 1 |
45. The applicants maintained that the provisions on political parties and Article 84 of the Constitution, which established a system of automatic forfeiture of parliamentary office following the dissolution of a political party, were incompatible with the Convention, in particular its Preamble and Articles 9, 10 and ... | 1 |
161. The applicants complained that the unjustified refusal of Russian authorities to grant the applicant community re-registration as a religious organisation violated their rights under Articles 9 and 11 of the Convention. The Court reiterates that complaints about the refusal of registration fall to be examined fro... | 1 |
40. The applicants maintained that Article <mask> of the Convention encompassed a negative right to freedom of association on an equal footing with the positive right and that consequently the Danish Protection against Dismissal due to Association Membership Act of 9 June 1982, as amended on 13 June 1990, violated tha... | 1 |
19. The applicant submitted that since in United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Ivanov (no. 2) (cited above) the Court had already examined the authorities’ actions in relation to the rally on 12 September 2007 and found a breach of Article <mask> of the Convention, it was no longer justified to examine that comp... | 1 |
54. The applicant complained that her unlawful detention for preventive purposes violated her right to liberty as provided in Article 5 § 1 of the Convention. That detention further served the purpose of preventing her from expressing her views on the transport of castor containers in demonstrations or by climbing act... | 1 |
84. The Government submitted that in some of the cases about which the applicants complained there had been no interference with their rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. Thus, on 30 July 2000, even though the mayor had banned the meeting and the District Court had upheld that ban, Ilinden had been able to ... | 1 |
22. The applicant association complained of a violation of its right to peaceful assembly. It claimed that the ban imposed on it on holding a demonstration had not been in accordance with the law, had not pursued any legitimate aim and had not been necessary in a democratic society. It relied on Article <mask> of the ... | 1 |
48. The applicant finally complained under Article <mask> of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 that trade unions did not protect his rights, that the judgment of 18 December 2002 remained unenforced and that he could not receive the wage arrears because the proceedings in his case had been excessively lon... | 1 |
22. The applicant complained about the refusal of the domestic courts to register it as an association. It further complained that it could not even reapply for registration, given the fact that by the time the registration request had been refused the deadline for the setting up of such professional associations had ... | 1 |
13. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention of a violation of his right to freedom of association, arguing that the rejection by the domestic courts of the application for registration of the association founded by him and four other associates had not been necessary in a democratic society and... | 1 |
42. The applicants complained under Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention that their right to freedom of expression and to freedom of association had been infringed in that they had not been admitted to the ABA because of the views that they had expressed about the state of the legal profession in the country. Having r... | 1 |
38. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the Constitutional Court’s decision declaring the Association’s Articles and Programme null and void had violated their freedom of association, in that it led to the dissolution of the Association and deprived its members of the possibility joint... | 1 |
84. The Government further alleged that the disorder at Bolotnaya Square had occurred when some of the organisers and participants had refused to follow the agreed plan and had attempted to march outside the agreed area. They had disregarded the police instructions to proceed to the designated venue at Bolotnaya emban... | 1 |
24. The applicants complained that the refusal of the respondent State to register the applicant association as a religious association had been in violation of their rights under Articles 9 and 11 of the Convention. For the reasons stated in the Ohrid Archdiocese case the Court considers that these complaints should ... | 1 |
28. The applicants argued that the refusal to register the Civic Committee had not been in accordance with the law, that it had not pursued a legitimate aim and had not been necessary in a democratic society. The applicants also alleged that their case concerned several aspects of the national legislation and administ... | 1 |
18. The Government submitted that in United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Ivanov (no. 2) (cited above) the Court had already given a broad ruling in relation to interference by the authorities with rallies organised by Ilinden. It was therefore not warranted to take up the same issue in a case brought by an indi... | 1 |
30. The applicants submitted that the reasons given by the Sofia Court of Appeal to uphold the refusal to register Ilinden had been arbitrary, insufficient and contrary to this Court’s case-law under Article <mask> of the Convention. The Sofia Court of Appeal had not properly explained the link between, on the one han... | 1 |
31. The applicants complained that the suppression of the demonstrations and the arrests made by the police were in violation of their rights to freedom of expression and assembly as provided in Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention. In respect of the events of 3 February 2009, the first applicant complained under Arti... | 1 |
262. The applicant contended that she had been invited to attend a meeting to be held on 20 June 1997, which had been organised by a radio station on the side of the line controlled by the Cypriot Government. The applicant and her daughter had applied, in advance, to the “TRNC” regime's Foreign Ministry for permission... | 1 |
15. The applicants complained that the dispersal of the demonstrations of 20 October 2012, 12 January, 26 January and 30 April 2013 by the police and their arrests and convictions for administrative offences had been in breach of their right to freedom of assembly, as provided for in Article <mask> of the Convention, ... | 1 |
29. The applicants complained that the failure by the Ministry of Justice to register their organisation in a timely manner constituted an interference with their freedom of association. As the Ministry evaded registering the organisation by significantly delaying the examination of their registration requests and bre... | 1 |
46. The applicant disagreed that the prohibition on participating in strikes for certain categories of railway workers was compatible with Article <mask> of the Convention. He alleged that the right to strike could be restricted, but not completely prohibited. Furthermore, such restrictions had to be “prescribed by la... | 1 |
20. The applicants complained that the failure by the Ministry of Justice to register their association in a timely manner constituted a violation of their right to freedom of association. As the Ministry had evaded registering the organisation by significantly delaying the examination of their registration request an... | 1 |
51. The applicants pointed out that the interference with their rights under Article <mask> of the Convention had not been lawful. The police had had no power to give them orders because they had not committed an administrative or criminal offence. The authorities had failed to effectively inform the demonstrators of ... | 1 |
45. The applicant reiterated that the Court had held – for instance, in National Union of Belgian Police v. Belgium (27 October 1975, § 39, Series A no. 19) – that the Convention safeguarded freedom to protect the occupational interests of trade union members by engaging in trade union action, the conduct and developm... | 1 |
26. The Government accepted, in view of the domestic courts’ findings, that the refusal to renew the applicant party’s registration and its dissolution were unlawful. However, they maintained that there has been no violation of the applicant party rights under Article <mask> of the Convention since the Presidium of th... | 1 |
113. The Government of the Republic of Moldova submitted that the Chamber had not struck a sufficient balance between the freedom of association claimed by the applicant union and the freedom of religion and right to autonomy of the Orthodox Church. They contended that Article <mask> of the Convention could not be con... | 1 |
35. The applicants further complained of violations of Article 5 § 1 (c), Article 10 and Article <mask> of the Convention. In this connection, they alleged that they had not been informed of the reasons for their arrest and that their rights to freedom of expression and association had been breached since they had bee... | 1 |
65. The applicants also complained that the levying of the monitoring fees on their wages had violated their right to negative freedom of association under Article <mask> of the Convention, since the fees had been tantamount to forced membership of the Union and had contributed to the general union activities. Moreove... | 1 |
53. The applicant complained of a violation of his right to peaceful assembly. He claimed that the ban repeatedly imposed by the Moscow authorities on holding the Pride March and the picketing had not been in accordance with the law, had not pursued any legitimate aim and had not been necessary in a democratic society... | 1 |
28. The applicant union complained, firstly, that the domestic courts had refused to recognise it as having the necessary representative status for collective bargaining within a company as a result of their incorrect approach to the calculation of its membership among the employees of Tukaş, and secondly, that the le... | 1 |
40. The applicants contested the Government’s interpretation, which they considered restrictive, of the concept of “trade union” set out in Article <mask> of the Convention. They affirmed that that article, including its aspect relating to trade unions freedom, concerned “everyone”, and not just persons with employee ... | 1 |
37. The applicants argued that the fact that they were fined for organising and/or participating at the CDPP gatherings amounted to a breach of their right to freedom of assembly as guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention. According to them, the present case was to be distinguished from Ziliberberg v. Moldova (... | 1 |
64. The applicant complained under Articles 9, 10 and 11 of the Convention that it had been arbitrarily stripped of its legal-entity status as a result of the refusal to re-register it as a religious organisation. The Court recalls that in a recent case it examined a substantially similar complaint about the refusal o... | 1 |
107. The Government of Cyprus submitted that the applicant's right to demonstrate under Article <mask> of the Convention had been interfered with in an aggravated and serious manner. The acts of the respondent Government were a deliberate and provocative attempt to disrupt a lawful demonstration in an area which was s... | 1 |
39. The Government considered that Article <mask> of the Convention was inapplicable to the present case on the grounds that neither the first applicant nor the other persons wishing to join the applicant trade union had held employee status. They pointed out that in its relevant well-established case-law the Court ha... | 1 |
54. The Government further argued that the bans had been prescribed by law, namely section 12(2)(2) of the Meetings and Marches Act. Also, the measures complained of had pursued a wide range of legitimate aims: protecting national security and public safety, guaranteeing public order in the local community, protecting... | 1 |
32. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that UMO Ilinden – PIRIN had been declared unconstitutional and as a result dissolved. They submitted that this interference with their freedom of association had not been prescribed by law, as in its interpretative judgment no. 7 of 1996 the Constit... | 1 |
49. The applicant argued that his convictions under Article 314 § 2 of the Criminal Code and section 7(2) of Law no. 3713 had constituted an interference with his right to freedom of assembly. He stated that the interference in question had not been prescribed by law, within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Conven... | 1 |
81. The applicant alleged a violation of his right to peaceful assembly. He complained, in particular, of disruptive security measures implemented at the site of the meeting at Bolotnaya Square, the early termination of the assembly, and his own arrest followed by his conviction for an administrative offence. He relie... | 1 |
229. The Government did not appear to contest that the fifth applicant, regardless of the fact that proceedings against him had been discontinued, could still claim to be a “victim” of a violation of his right under Article <mask> of the Convention and that there had been an interference with that right (see paragraph... | 1 |
61. The applicants submitted that the ban on meetings organised by them in commemoration of certain historical events, and the attitude of the authorities at the relevant time were aimed at suppressing the free expression of ideas at peaceful gatherings. As such they amounted to an interference with their rights under... | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.