CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

- مكتبة
- تسجيل الدخول

مرتبة حسب

تم إضافة التاريخ

25 العلاقات, 24 الكيانات

اختر الفقرة المستهدفة3

● ● ●

أوازي من إعداد:
CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law
مكتبة
تسجيل الدخول

معلومات
25العلاقات

Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia

Case Law

نصائح البحث

بحث النص

Type something in the search box to get some results.

جدول المحتويات

لا يوجد جدول المحتويات

لا جدول محتويات الوصف

Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia

Case Law

Country

Russia

Country Location

خط العرض: 55.84775990443999

خط الطول: 37.50146462023251

Country Location (مرتبط Case Law): Russia

Decision Date: 23 يونيو 2020

Case Status: أُغلقت / إنتهت

Case Outcome Procedural

Admissible

Case Outcome (Disposition)

انتهاك قاعدة من قواعد القانون الدولي

Keywords

Content Regulation / Censorship
Filtering and Blocking

Judicial Body: المحكمة الأوروبية لحقوق الإنسان

Court Name: European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

Case Number: Application no. 10795/14

Case Summary: The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that the Russian authorities’ decision to block the IP address of an offending website, which in turn resulted in the blocking of the applicant’s website, amounted to a violation of the applicant’s right to impart information (Article 10), and the right to an effective remedy (Article 13 read in conjunction with Article 10) of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). The applicant’s website availed the hosting services of a U.S.-based company that further hosted multiple other websites with the same IP address; the applicant, in effect, shared their IP address with other websites, though with a different domain name. In December 2012, the government authorities blocked access to an IP address that contained offending material, however, the applicant also shared the same IP address. Resultantly, access to the applicant’s website was blocked, which the applicant only came to know about after the blocking order was passed and implemented. Upon finding out about the order, the applicant appealed against it on the ground that they were unconnected to the offending website and that their legitimate content is being harmed, however, all their attempts to appeal and complaints were rejected. The ECtHR held that the interference from the application of the procedural law had arbitrary and excessive effects; it did not afford the applicant the requisite degree of protection and opportunity to be heard. Additionally, the ECtHR found that the domestic law remedy was ineffective; the appellate court did not consider the substance of the applicant’s grievances.

Case Significance: This decision expands expression.

This case did not set a binding or persuasive precedent either within or outside its jurisdiction. The significance of this case is undetermined at this point in time.

Related Caselaw

Ahmet Yildirim v. Turkey

Source Name and URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

Columbia

المستندات الأولية

Third Section Judgment
English
تحميل عرض

لا مرجع

References are parts of this document related with other documents and entities.

Country1
- Country1
Precedent23
- Case Law23
لا تسمية1
- Secondary Source1

Create Reference

اختر نوع العلاقة

Original Law Cited
Related Translation
Related Media Source
Country
Related Law
Related Regulations
Related Secondary Law
Related Amendments
Related Draft Amendments
Related Case Law
Related Analysis

نصائح البحث

إضافة كيانات (أو إدخالات)/ مستندات

نصائح البحث

Notifications

You're all caught up

New activity will show up here.