CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 15 octobre 2018

.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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 15 October 2018   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 68373/14 Cristina RUSU against Romania lodged on 2 October 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the sentence imposed on the applicant, who is a teacher, by the Bistrița-Năsăud County Court on 3 April 2014 for two press articles wrote and published by her on the internet sites of two media outlets and for the statements made during a local television talk-show about the head of the Bistrița-Năsăud School Inspectorate and her mismanagement in organising several local and national school competitions for students. In particular, the applicant argued that the sentence imposed on her to pay civil damages and the failure of the domestic courts to provide relevant and sufficient reasons for their decision, amounted to a breach of her freedom of expression. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression contrary to Article   10 of the Convention (see Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, 7 February 2012)?