Klein against the Slovak Republic - 72208/01 [2011] ECHR 1678 (08 August 2011)

Klein against the Slovak Republic - 72208/01 [2011] ECHR 1678 (08 August 2011)

The applicant's conviction for defamation constituted a violation of Article 10 because the interference with his right to freedom of expression was neither necessary in a democratic society nor proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] ECHR 1678
Parties
Applicant: Klein; Respondent: Slovak Republic
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
08 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Execution of Judgment and Closure of Supervision by Committee of Ministers
Outcome
Supervision of execution of judgment closed; applicant acquitted; state found to have complied with obligations under Article 46.
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Defamation, Article 10 ECHR, Criminal Conviction, Reopening of Proceedings
Human Rights Law Criminal Law Freedom of Expression Defamation Article 10 ECHR Criminal Conviction Reopening of Proceedings

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Klein

Applicant

Slovak Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Execution of Judgment and Closure of Supervision by Committee of Ministers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's criminal conviction for defamation violated his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's conviction for defamation constituted a violation of Article 10 because the interference with his right to freedom of expression was neither necessary in a democratic society nor proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.

Court Disposition

Supervision of execution of judgment closed; applicant acquitted; state found to have complied with obligations under Article 46.

Orders

  • Payment of just satisfaction to applicant for non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses.
  • Reopening of criminal proceedings and acquittal of applicant.