CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 novembre 2016
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-169042
- Date
- 3 novembre 2016
- Publication
- 3 novembre 2016
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleCommunicated
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 3 November 2016   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 70693/11 Klaus Günter ANNEN against Germany lodged on 26 October 2011 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a civil injunction and an order to pay compensation. The applicant is a campaigner against the right to abortion. He operates an anti-abortion website which includes a list of “abortion doctors” whose full names and addresses are mentioned. The German courts prohibited the applicant from continuing labelling abortions such as those performed by a named doctor murder on his website. The applicant was further ordered to pay compensation for violation of the doctor’s personality rights. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES   1.     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression contrary to Article 10 of the Convention?   2.     Should the present case be distinguished from the Court’s judgment Annen v. Germany , no. 3690/10, 26 November 2015 in view of the circumstance - that the Karlsruhe Regional Court took it as a fact that the doctor was Jewish – whereas the question was immaterial in the Karlsruhe Court of Appel’s view – and - that according to the Karlsruhe Regional Court the applicant considered it continuously appropriate during the first instance proceedings to compare abortions to the Holocaust?Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 3 novembre 2016
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-169042
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel