if you are asking for a cite you obviosly havent understood it..imo..my highlight added in red
What is at stake, fundamentally, is to identify the legal good that will be, concretely, prevailing, taking into account that, in each conflict resolution, the balance pans, to begin with, are in a position of equilibrium, since freedom of expression(article 10) and honour (article 8)must start from a position of equality.
For this purpose, it is necessary to introduce the respective evaluation criteria in the pan of freedom of expression or in the pan of honour.
And it is playing with weights and counterweights that, in the end, it will appear which of the pans weighs more.
Well, in the present case, as it results from the foregoing, the pan that weighs more and is the freedom of expression one.
Which amounts to saying that this is the legal good that, in this case, prevails.
Page 75
Thus we shall have to conclude that, in the present case, prevail the rights of the respondents to freedom of expression and information and to freedom of the press and of the media
The balance between 8 and 10 is precisely what teh ECHR can deal with...and from the cases ive provide a link to it seems to me teh SC got it wrong
Was the SC right on this point: "Well, in the present case, as it results from the foregoing, the pan that weighs more and is the freedom of expression one"? Who is doing the weighing?
