- Author
- Dirk Voorhoof (UGent)
- Organization
- Abstract
- Again, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has found a violation of the right to freedom of expression on the Internet in Russia (see also Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and Others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia reported in Iris 2020:8). In a defamation case, the domestic judicial authorities have failed to establish convincingly and in conformity with the principles embodied in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) that there had been a pressing social need to impose a high amount of damages to be paid by an online news platform for its reporting on a commercial company in relation to the discovery of a potential health hazard.
- Keywords
- Freedom of expression, journalism, online news platform, defamation, public interest, responsible journalism, proportionality of award of damages
Downloads
-
IRIS.pdf
- full text (Published version)
- |
- open access
- |
- |
- 63.13 KB
Citation
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication: http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-8678845
- MLA
- Voorhoof, Dirk. “European Court of Human Rights : OOO Regnum v. Russia.” IRIS (ENGLISH ED. ONLINE), no. 9, 2020, pp. 11–13.
- APA
- Voorhoof, D. (2020). European Court of Human Rights : OOO Regnum v. Russia.
- Chicago author-date
- Voorhoof, Dirk. 2020. “European Court of Human Rights : OOO Regnum v. Russia.” IRIS (ENGLISH ED. ONLINE).
- Chicago author-date (all authors)
- Voorhoof, Dirk. 2020. “European Court of Human Rights : OOO Regnum v. Russia.” IRIS (ENGLISH ED. ONLINE).
- Vancouver
- 1.Voorhoof D. European Court of Human Rights : OOO Regnum v. Russia. IRIS (ENGLISH ED. ONLINE). 2020. p. 11–3.
- IEEE
- [1]D. Voorhoof, “European Court of Human Rights : OOO Regnum v. Russia,” IRIS (ENGLISH ED. ONLINE), no. 9. pp. 11–13, 2020.
@misc{8678845,
abstract = {{Again, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has found a violation of the right to freedom of expression on the Internet in Russia (see also Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia, OOO Flavus and Others v. Russia, Bulgakov v. Russia and Engels v. Russia reported in Iris 2020:8). In a defamation case, the domestic judicial authorities have failed to establish convincingly and in conformity with the principles embodied in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) that there had been a pressing social need to impose a high amount of damages to be paid by an online news platform for its reporting on a commercial company in relation to the discovery of a potential health hazard.}},
articleno = {{2020-9:1/18}},
author = {{Voorhoof, Dirk}},
issn = {{2078-6158}},
keywords = {{Freedom of expression,journalism,online news platform,defamation,public interest,responsible journalism,proportionality of award of damages}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{9}},
pages = {{2020-9:1/18:11--2020-9:1/18:13}},
series = {{IRIS (ENGLISH ED. ONLINE)}},
title = {{European Court of Human Rights : OOO Regnum v. Russia}},
url = {{https://merlin.obs.coe.int/article/8984}},
year = {{2020}},
}