Previous 1 / 26 Next

CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE COUNCIL OF EUROPE COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASE OF FRESSOZ AND ROIRE v. FRANCE (Application no. 29183/95) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 21 January 1999

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Fressoz and Roire v. France

Case Law

Country

France

Country Location

Latitude: 46.808568018841505

Longitude: 2.799314618110868

Country Location (linked Case Law): France

Decision Date: Jan 21, 1999

Case Status: Closed

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Admissible

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Violation of a Rule of International Law

Keywords

Access to Information
Confidentiality
Freedom of Press
Public Interest

Judicial Body: European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

Court Name: European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

Case Number: App. No. 29183/95

Case Summary: The European Court of Human Rights found that the conviction of two journalists for publishing photocopies of illegally obtained tax documents when the information obtained in the documents was freely available to the public, violated Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Roger Fressoz and Claude Roire published information on the earnings of Jacques Calvet, the Chairman and Managing director of Peugeot, which revealed a 45.9% rise in his salary at a time of industrial unrest. The Court reasoned that the information about Calvet’s annual income was lawful and the applicants’ conviction for having published the documents in which that information was contained, namely the tax assessments, could not be justified under Article 10. The Court said that Article 10 protects journalists’ right to divulge information on issues of general interest provided that they are acting in good faith and on an accurate factual basis. Hence, Article 10 essentially leaves it up to journalists to decide whether or not it is necessary to reproduce documents, here the tax assessments, to ensure credibility. Accordingly, in this case, the interest in freedom of the press in a democratic society outweighed the need to punish journalists for publishing the materials.

Case Significance: This case expands expression by holding that the state failed to carry out a proper balancing exercise between its legitimate aim in pursuing the journalists’ conviction, namely to protect the reputation or rights of others and to prevent the disclosure of information received in confidence, and a democratic society’s interest in protecting the freedom of the press.

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

Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights are binding upon parties to the case and constitute an authoritative interpretation of the meaning of Convention rights for all other states that are party to the Convention.

Source URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

Columbia

Date Updated: Jul 3, 2024

Primary Documents

CASE OF FRESSOZ AND ROIRE v. FRANCE.pdf
English
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

Fressoz and Roire v. France

Primary Documents

Notifications