MORAR v. ROMANIA - 25217/06 - Chamber Judgment (French Text) [2015] ECHR 668 (07 July 2015)

MORAR v. ROMANIA - 25217/06 - Chamber Judgment (French Text) [2015] ECHR 668 (07 July 2015)

The Court found that the applicant's conviction for criminal defamation and the civil damages imposed constituted an unjustified interference with his freedom of expression under Article 10. The articles concerned matters of public interest, the applicant acted within the bounds of journalistic satire, and the respondent was engaged in public political activity. The penalties were disproportionate, especially the damages, and the national courts failed to provide relevant and sufficient reasons for the interference. No violation of Article 6 was found as the applicant did not request adjournment to review documents.

Citation
[2015] ECHR 668
Parties
Applicant: Ioan T. Morar; Respondent: V. G.
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
07 July 2015
Procedural Posture
European Court of Human Rights Application / Chamber Judgment
Outcome
Violation of Article 10; No violation of Article 6
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Defamation, Journalistic Ethics, Damages, Fair Trial
Human Rights Media Law Criminal Law Civil Law Freedom of Expression Defamation Journalistic Ethics Damages +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ioan T. Morar

Applicant

V. G.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

European Court of Human Rights Application / Chamber Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's conviction for criminal defamation violated Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's trial violated Article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicant's conviction for criminal defamation and the civil damages imposed constituted an unjustified interference with his freedom of expression under Article 10. The articles concerned matters of public interest, the applicant acted within the bounds of journalistic satire, and the respondent was engaged in public political activity. The penalties were disproportionate, especially the damages, and the national courts failed to provide relevant and sufficient reasons for the interference. No violation of Article 6 was found as the applicant did not request adjournment to review documents.

Court Disposition

Violation of Article 10; No violation of Article 6

Orders

  • Romania to pay applicant 18,445 EUR for pecuniary damages
  • Romania to pay applicant 6,000 EUR for non-pecuniary damages