The Court emphasised the duty of the press to impart information and ideas on matters of public interest, but noted that: ‘a fundamental distinction needs to be made between reporting facts – even if controversial – capable of contributing to a debate in a democratic society and making tawdry allegations about an individual’s private life’;
Judges:
Francoise Tulkens, P
Citations:
(2009) 48 EHRR 53, [2009] EMLR 7, 36919/02, [2008] ECHR 1526, 27 BHRC 389
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 10
Cited by:
See Also – Armonas v Lithuania ECHR 2-Dec-2010
. .
Cited – PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd SC 19-May-2016
The appellants had applied for restrictions on the publication of stories about their extra marital affairs. The Court of Appeal had removed the restrictions on the basis that the story had been widely spread outside the jurisdiction both on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Media
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278443