Search
document

Document text Analytics

Kärntner ECHO, Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H. v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 11670/85 • ECHR ID: 001-208

Document date: March 8, 1988

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

Kärntner ECHO, Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H. v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 11670/85 • ECHR ID: 001-208

Document date: March 8, 1988

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 11670/85

by Kärntner ECHO, Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.

against Austria

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private

on 8 March 1988, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

J.A. FROWEIN

S. TRECHSEL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A. WEITZEL

H. DANELIUS

G. BATLINER

J. CAMPINOS

H. VANDENBERGHE

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 17 July 1985

by Kärntner Echo, Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H against Austria and registered

on 5 August 1985 under file No. 11670/85;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the

Rules of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant was a newspaper company with legal personality

under Austrian law and had its seat in Klagenfurt. In the proceedings

before the Commission the applicant was represented by Mr. G. Seeber,

a lawyer practising in Klagenfurt.

On 3 January 1984 the Klagenfurt Regional Court (Landesgericht)

convicted the applicant for defamation in respect of another newspaper.

The Court found that in an unsigned letter to the editor published by

the applicant the other newspaper's political independence had been

denied. The applicant's appeal (Berufung) was dismissed by the Court

of Appeal (Oberlandesgericht) of Graz on 21 September 1984.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant company complained under Article 10 of the

Convention of its conviction by the Austrian Courts. It claimed that

the allegedly defamatory passage in the letter to the editor had to be

considered as a political opinion and had, therefore, to be tolerated

as part of political discussions in mass media.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 17 July 1985 and registered

on 5 August 1985. On 13 October 1986 the Commission decided to bring

the application to the notice of the respondent Government and to

invite them to submit written observations on its admissibility and

merits. The observations of the respondent Government were after two

extensions of the time-limit submitted on 11 May 1987 and communicated

to the applicant's representative for observations in reply.

In reply to a reminder the applicant's representative informed

the Commission's Secretariat on 28 July 1987 that bankruptcy proceedings

had been instituted against the applicant company and that he had

resigned as its representative. The official liquidator would

presumably not intend to pursue the application. The official

liquidator did not reply to the Secretariat's letter of 5 August 1987

inviting him to state whether he wished to pursue the case.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the applicant company is at present

liquidated in bankruptcy proceedings. Its former representative and

the official liquidator apparently do not intend to pursue the case.

The Commission considers that, in these circumstances, the

applicant company must be considered as having lost interest in maintaining

its application. The Commission sees no reason relating to the

general interest to continue an examination of its application.

For these reasons, the Commission

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant