18598/91, decision of the Commission of 18   May   1994, Decisions and Reports (DR)   78; Association   des   amis   de   Saint-Raphaël   et   de   Fréjus

national authorities but rather to review under Article 10, in the light of the case as a whole, the decisions they have taken pursuant to their power of appreciation (see, among many other authorities, Fressoz

  the United Kingdom , judgment of 27   March 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996 ‑ II, p. 500, § 39, and Fressoz and Roire v.   France [GC], no.

exercising its supervisory function is not to take the place of the competent domestic courts but rather to review under Article 10 the decisions they have taken pursuant to their power of appreciation (see Fressoz

    It is not necessary for a Convention right to be explicitly raised in domestic proceedings, provided that the complaint is raised “at least in substance” (see Fressoz and Roire v.

Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, §§ 144 and 146, ECHR 2010; and Fressoz and Roire v.

exercising its supervisory function is not to take the place of the competent domestic courts but rather to review under Article 10 the decisions they have taken pursuant to their power of appreciation (see Fressoz

national authorities but rather to review under Article 10, in the light of the case as a whole, the decisions they have taken pursuant to their power of appreciation (see, among many other authorities, Fressoz

subject to the proviso that they are acting in good faith and on an accurate factual basis and provide “reliable and precise” information in accordance with the ethics of journalism (see, for example, Fressoz

Turkey, judgment of 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996- VI, § 51, Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], No. 29183/95, § 37, ECHR 1999-I).

national authorities but rather to review under Article 10, in the light of the case as a whole, the decisions they have taken pursuant to their power of appreciation (see, among many other authorities, Fressoz

national authorities but rather to review under Article 10, in the light of the case as a whole, the decisions they have taken pursuant to their power of appreciation (see, among many other authorities, Fressoz

of public interest is subject to the proviso that they are acting in good faith in order to provide accurate and reliable information in accordance with the ethics of journalism (see, for example, Fressoz

Turkey , 16 September 1996, §§   65 ‑ 69, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996 ‑ IV; and Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, § 37, ECHR 1999 ‑ I).

interest is subject to the proviso that they are acting in good faith and on an accurate factual basis and providing reliable and precise information in accordance with the ethics of journalism (see Fressoz

exactly the same terms before domestic courts as before this Court, provided that the substance of the complaint has been aired in domestic proceedings in accordance with any formal requirements (see Fressoz

  the United Kingdom , judgment of 27   March 1996, Reports 1996 ‑ II, p. 500, § 39; Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no.

A fresh hearing was scheduled for 8 June 1988, when it did actually take place.

.; Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no.   29183/95, §§   53-56, ECHR 1999 ‑ I; Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no.