22 EINARSSON v. ICELAND JUDGMENT - SEPARATE OPINION Consequently, I am unable to find that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention.

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Einarsson v. Iceland

Case Law

Country

Country Location

Latitude: 65.3085823756205

Longitude: -17.714708543468866

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Keywords

Case Summary: The European Court of Human Rights found that the courts in Iceland had violated a controversial media personality’s right to a private life by rejecting his defamation claim against an internet user who called him a “rapist” online. The case concerned a well-known blogger, writer and media personality who had been accused by a woman of rape. One week after the rape case against him was dismissed, an Instagram user published a modified image of the media personality with the caption “[f]uck you rapist bastard”. The national courts refused to find the Instagram user liable for defamation because his statement, in context, amounted to a value judgment. The European Court of Human Rights disagreed with the approach of the national courts, stating that the national courts had failed to strike a fair balance between the media personality’s right to respect for his private life and the Instagram user’s right to freedom of expression. The European Court of Human Rights took particular issue with the domestic courts’ classification of the term “rapist” as a value judgment, rather than a statement of fact. As a result, it found a violation of the media personality’s right to respect for his private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Case Significance: The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.