Article 10(1)

Question 1

Freedom to hold opinion

Answer 1

Cant be interfered with by state
Vogt v Germany
Equality Act dictates opinions

Question 2

Freedom to impart

Answer 2

Freedom of press
Political expression
Artistic expression
high and low value expression
Hate speech

Question 3

Freedom of press

Answer 3

s.12(4)HRA: extremely important form, but can be restricted. Thompson & venables
Goodwin v UK - protect sources
Conflict with article 8 - Flitcroft v MGN

Question 4

Axel springer v germany

Answer 4

Nature of information and if of public interest
notoriety of person concerned
how information was obtained
content, form and consequences of publication
severity of sanction

Question 5

Political expression

Answer 5

Lingens v austria - wider margin of criticism
Incal v turkey- vitrolic criticism
Jersild v denmark- interviewee shocking views
Steel and morris - strong views and big companies
Hashman and harrup v uk - fox hunting

Question 6

Artistic expression

Answer 6

Generally wider margin
Muller v Switzerland- graphic sexual paintings
Otto-preminger v austria - jesus and mary porn
BBK v austria - satirical
HRA s.12(4) - “journalistic, literary or artistic” special importance

Question 7

High and low value expression

Answer 7

Political, religious, public interest - high
Commercial, artistic - low but can be high for artistic

Question 8

Hate speech

Answer 8

Hate speech not protected - garaudy v france

Question 9

Freedom to receive information and ideas

Answer 9

Autronic AG v Switzerland- tv licenses, cant ban but can charge
Guerra v Italy - Positive obligation to provide information
Freedom of information act 2000