Delfi AS v. Estonia - 64569/09 - Legal Summary [2013] ECHR 1218 (10 October 2013)

Delfi AS v. Estonia - 64569/09 - Legal Summary [2013] ECHR 1218 (10 October 2013)

The Court held that the restriction on the applicant's freedom of expression was justified and proportionate because the applicant exercised substantial control over the comments, could have foreseen the risk of defamatory comments, and the damages awarded were moderate. The liability regime was necessary to protect the rights of third parties and did not violate Article 10.

Citation
[2013] ECHR 1218
Parties
Applicant: Delfi AS; Respondent: Estonia
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
10 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Judgment
Outcome
no violation of Article 10
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Liability of Internet Intermediaries, Defamation, Online Comments
Human Rights Law Media Law Defamation Freedom of Expression Liability of Internet Intermediaries Online Comments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Delfi AS

Applicant

Estonia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether holding an internet news portal liable for defamatory comments posted by third parties violates Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the restriction on the applicant's freedom of expression was justified and proportionate because the applicant exercised substantial control over the comments, could have foreseen the risk of defamatory comments, and the damages awarded were moderate. The liability regime was necessary to protect the rights of third parties and did not violate Article 10.

Court Disposition

no violation of Article 10