Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T19:14:28.452Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Table of Cases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2025

Edited by
Tiina Pajuste
Tiina Pajuste
Affiliation:
Tallinn University

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Human Rights in the Digital Domain
Core Questions
 , pp. xiii - xx
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

Table of Cases

European Court of Human Rights

  • Ádám and others v. Romania, Applications nos. 81114/17 and 5 others, Judgment of 13 October 2020, 416

  • Ahmet Yıldırım v. Turkey, Application no. 3111/10, Judgment of 18 December 2012, 168, 318

  • Amann v. Switzerland [GC], Application no. 27798/95, Judgment of 16 February 2000, 289, 293

  • Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], Application no. 48876/08, Judgment of 22 April 2013, 250

  • Antović and Mirković v. Montenegro, Application no. 70838/13, Judgment of 28 November 2017, 289

  • Appleby and Others v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 44306/98, Judgment of 6 May 2003, ECHR 2003-VI 185, 161

  • Association BURESTOP 55 et autres c. France, Application no. 56176/18 et al., Judgment of 1 July 2021, 250

  • Bӑrbulescu v. Romania [GC], Application no. 61496/08, Judgment of 5 September 2017, 288

  • Barthold v. Germany, Application no. 8734/79, Judgment of 25 March 1985, 193

  • Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania, Application no. 41288/15, Judgment of 14 January 2020, 91

  • Bernh Larsen Holding AS and others v. Norway, Application no. 24117/08, Judgment of 14 March 2013, 290

  • Biancardi v. Italy, Application no. 77419/16, Judgment of 25 November 2021, 25

  • Botta v. Italy, Application no. 21439/93, Judgment of 24 February 1998, 288

  • Bowman v. the United Kingdom, Case no. 141/1996/762/959, Judgment of 19 February 1998, 317, 318

  • Capital Bank AD v. Bulgaria, Application no. 49429/99, Judgment of 24 November 2005, 297

  • Case ‘Relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium’ v. Belgium, Application no 1474/62 et al., Judgment of 23 July 1968, 413

  • Catan and Others v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia [GC], Application no. 43370/04, 8252/05 and 18454/06, Judgment of 19 October 2012, 414

  • Cengiz and Others v. Turkey, Application nos. 48226/10 and 14027/11, Judgment of 1 December 201, 318

  • Centro Europa 7 S.R.L. and Di Stefano v. Italy, Application no. 38433/09, Judgment of 7 June 2012, 250

  • Chapman v. UK [GC], Application no. 27238/95, Judgment of 18 January 2001, 416

  • Cicad v. Switzerland, Application no. 7211/06, Judgment of 07 June 2016, 184

  • Copland v. United Kingdom, Application no. 62617/00, Judgment of 3 April 2007, 293

  • Cyprus v. Turkey [GC], Application no. 25781/94, Judgment of 10 May 2001, 413, 414

  • Delfi AS v. Estonia, Application no. 64569/09, Judgment of 16 June 2015, 60, 318

  • Dink v. Turkey Application No. 2668/07, Judgment of 14 September 2010, 162

  • Dragojević v. Croatia, Application no. 68955/11, Judgment of 15 January 2015, 292

  • Džibuti and Others v. Latvia, Application no. 225/20 and 2 others, Judgment of 16 November 2023, 415

  • Ecodefefence and 60 others v. Russia, Applications nos. 9988/13 and 60 others, Judgment of 14 June 2022, 186

  • Editorial Board of Pravoye Delo and Shtekel v. Ukraine, Application no. 33014/05, Judgment of 5 May 2011, 82, 183

  • Erbakan v. Turkey, Application no. 59405/00, Judgment of 6 July 2006, 186

  • Faber v. Hungary, Application no. 40721/08, Judgment of 24 July 2012, 177

  • Garaudy v. France, Application no. 65831/01, Decision of 24 June 2003, 186

  • Gaughran v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 45245/15, Judgment of 13 February 2020, 290

  • Goodwin v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 17488/90, Judgment of 27 March 1996, 193

  • Guja v. Moldova, Application no. 14277/04, Judgment of 12 February 2008, 180, 195

  • Hachette Filipacchi Associés (ICI PARIS) v. France, Application no. 12268/03, Judgment of 23 July 2009, 287

  • Handyside v.UK, Application no. 5493/72, Judgment of 7 December 1976, 71, 250, 317, 324

  • Herbecq and the association ‘Ligue des droits de l’homme’ v. Belgium, Applications no. 32200/96 and 32201/96, Decision of 14 January 1998, 289

  • Informationsverein Lentia and Others v. Austria (1993) Application nos. 13914/88, 15041/89, 15717/89, 15779/89, 17207/90, Judgment of 24 November 1993, Series A no 276, 162, 174

  • Jersild v. Denmark, Application no. 15890/89, Judgment of 23 September 1994, 182, 193, 197

  • Kaya v. Turkey, Application no. 22729/93, Judgment of 19 February 1998, 160

  • Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan, Application nos. 65286/13 and 57270/14, Judgment of 10 April 2019, 162

  • Köpke v. Germany (dec.), Application no. 420/07, Decision of 5 October 2010, 288

  • Kruslin v. France, Application no. 11801/85, Judgment of 24 April 1990, 305

  • Leempoel & S.A. ED. Ciné Revue v. Belgium, Application no. 64772/01, Judgment of 9 November 2006, 287

  • Lingens v. Austria, Application no. 9815/82, Judgment of 8 July 1986, 316, 317

  • López Ribalda and Others v. Spain [GC], Applications nos. 1874/13 and 8567/13, Judgment of 17 October 2019, 287, 289

  • Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary, Application no. 18030/11, Judgment of 8 November 2016, 183, 193, 194

  • Magyar Jeti Zrt v. Hungary, Application no. 11257/2016, Judgment of 4 December 2018, 86, 87

  • Magyar Kétfarkú Kutya Párt v. Hungary, Application no. 201/17, Judgment of 20 January 2020, 92

  • Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete and Index.Hu Zrt v. Hungary (MTE v. Hungary), Application no. 22947/13, Judgment of 2 February 2016, 60, 184

  • Manole and Others v. Moldova, Application no. 13936/02, Judgment of 17 September 2009, ECHR 2009-IV 213, 162, 174

  • Mathieu-Mohin and Clerfayt v. Belgium, Application no. 9267/81, Judgment of 2 March 1987, 317

  • M’Bala M’Bala v. France, Application no. 25239/13, Decision of 20 October 2015, 186

  • Melnychuk v. Ukraine, Application no. 17707/02, 19 October 2004, ECHR 2005-IX 397, 162

  • Merabishvili v. Georgia [GC], Application no. 72508/13, Judgment of 28 November 2017, 188, 195

  • Mouvement raëlien suisse v. Switzerland [GC], Application no. 16354/06, Judgment of 13 July 2012, 250

  • Navalnyy v. Russia, Application nos. 29580/12 and 4 others, Judgment of 15 November 2018, 188

  • Niemietz v. Germany, Application no. 13710/88, Judgment of 16 December 1992, 288

  • NIT S.R.L v. Moldova, Application no. 28470/12, Judgment of 5 April 2022, 194

  • Oganezova v. Armenia, Application no. 72961/12, Judgment of 17 May 2022, 186

  • Öllinger v. Austria, Application no. 76900/01, Judgment of 29 June 2006, 177

  • OOO Memo v. Russia, Application no. 2840/10, Judgment of 16 June 2022, 183, 184

  • Oršuš and Others v. Croatia [GC], Application no. 15766/03, Judgment of 16 March 2010, 421

  • Özgür Gündem v. Turkey, Application no. 23144/93, Judgment of 16 March 2000, ECHR 2000-III 1, 161, 162

  • P. G. and J. H. v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 44787/98, Judgment of 25 September 2001, 288, 289, 290

  • Paksas v. Lithuania, Application no. 34932/04, Judgment of 6 January 2011, 175, 187

  • Party for a Democratic Society (DTP) and Others v. Turkey, Application nos. 3870/10, 3870/10, 3878/10, 15616/10, 21919/10, 39118/10 and 37272/10, Judgment of 12 January 2016, 192

  • Pastörs v. Germany, Application no. 55225/14, Judgment of 3 October 2019, 186

  • Peck v. United Kingdom, Application no. 44647/98, Judgment of 28 January 2003, 288, 289, 291

  • Perincek v. Switzerland, Application no. 27510/08, Judgment of 15 October 2015, 187

  • Pihl v. Sweden [ECHR], Application no. 74742/14, Judgment of 9 March 2017, 95

  • Refah Partisi (the Welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey, Application nos. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98, and 41344/98, Judgment of 13 July 2003, 177, 179, 180

  • Reklos and Davourlis v. Greece, Application no. 1234/05, Judgment of 15 January 2009, 287

  • Rotaru v. Romania [GC], Application no. 28341/95, Judgment of 4 May 2000, 289

  • S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom [GC], Applications nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04, Judgment of 4 December 2008, 299

  • Sanchez v. France [GC], Application no. 45581/15, Judgment of 15 May 2023, 189

  • Savickis and Others v. Latvia [GC], Application no. 49270/11, Judgment of 9 June 2022, 415

  • Savva Terentyev v. Russia, Application no. 10692/09, Judgment of 28 August 2018, 90

  • Schüssel v. Austria (dec.), Application no. 42409/98, Decision of 21 February 2002, 287

  • Sciacca v. Italy, Application no. 50774/99, Judgment of 11 January 2005, 287

  • Smith and Grady v. UK, Application nos. 33985/96 and 33986/96, Judgment of 27 September 1999, VI 72, 160

  • Soering v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 14038/88, Judgment of 7 July 1989, 179

  • Standard Verlags GmbH v. Austria (no. 2), Application no. 21277/05, Judgment of 4 June 2009, 287

  • Standard Verlagsgesellschaft mbH v. Austria (no. 3), Application no. 39378/15, Judgment of 07 December 2021, 185

  • Sürek and Özdemir v. Turkey, Application nos. 23927/94 and 24277/94, Judgment of 8 July 1999, 180

  • Társaság a Szabadságjogokért v. Hungary, Application no. 37374/05, Judgment of 14 April 2009, 193

  • Traktörer Aktiebolag v. Sweden, Application no. 10873/84, Judgment of 7 July 1989, 297

  • Uzun v. Germany, Application no. 35623/05, Judgment of 2 September 2010, 292

  • Vajnai v. Hungary, Application no. 33629/06, Judgment of 08 July 2008, 181

  • Valenzuela Contreras v. Spain, Application no. 27671/95, Judgment of 30 July 1998, 305

  • Valiullina and Others v. Latvia, Applications nos. 56928/19, 7306/20 and 11937/20, Judgment of 14 September 2023, 414

  • Vereinigung Bildender Künstler v. Austria, Application no. 68354/01, Judgment of 25 January 2007, 211

  • Vogt v. Germany, Application no. 17851/91, Judgment of 26 September 1995, 177

  • Von Hannover v. Germany, Application no. 59320/00, Judgment of 24 June 2004, 287, 288

  • Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) [GC], Applications nos. 40660/08 and 60641/08, Judgment of 7 February 2012, 287

  • Ždanoka v. Latvia, Application no. 58278/00, Judgment of 16 March 2006, 177, 178, 179, 180

European Union Courts

  • Case C-294/83, Partiécologiste „Les Verts” v. European Parliament [1986] ECLI:EU:C:1986:166, 77

  • Case C-131/12, Google Spain SL and Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González [2014] ECLI:EU:C:2014:317, 78

  • Case C-136/17, G.C. and others v. CNIL [2019] EU:C:2019:773, 78

  • Case C-18/18, Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek v. Facebook Ireland Limited [2019] ECLI:EU:C:2019:821, 244

  • Case C-264/14, Skatteverket v. David Hedqvist [2015] ECLI:EU:C:2015:718, 87

  • Case C-314/12, UPC Telekabel Wien GmbH v. Constantin Film Verleih GmbH and Wega Filmproduktionsgesellschaft mbH [2014] ECLI:EU:C:2014:192, 162, 243

  • Case C-324/09, L’Oréal SA and Others v. eBay International AG and Others [2011] ECLI:EU:C:2011:474, 243

  • Case C-360/13, Public Relations Consultants Association Ltd. v. Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and Others [2014] ECLI:EU:C:2014:1195, 88

  • Case C-362/14, Maximillian Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner [2015] ECLI:EU:C:2015:650, 79

  • Case C-390/18, Airbnb Ireland UC [2019] ECLI:EU:C:2019:1112, 88

  • Case C-414/16, Vera Egenberger v. Evangelisches Werk für Diakonie und Entwicklung e.V. [2018] ECLI:EU:C:2018:257, 77, 257

  • Case C-43/75, Defrenne v. Sabena [1976] ECLI:EU:C:1976:56, 77

  • Case C-438/05, International Transport Workers’ Federation and Finnish Seamen’s Union v. Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Eesti [2007] ECLI:EU:C:2007:772, 256

  • Case C-460/20, Google (Déréférencement d’un contenu prétendument inexact) [2022] ECLI:EU:C:2022:962, 247

  • Case C-460/20, TU, RE v Google LLC [2022] ECLI:EU:C:2022:962, 286

  • Case C-490/20, V.M.A. v. Stolichna obshtina, rayon ‘Pancharevo’ [2021] ECLI:EU:C:2021:1008, 382

  • Case C-507/17, Google LLC v. CNIL [2019] EU:C:2019:772, 78, 169, 247

  • Case C-62/19, Star Taxi App SRL v. Unitatea Administrativ Teritorialӑ Municipiul Bucureşti prin Primar General and others [2020] ECLI:EU:C:2020:980, 89

  • Case C-68/17, IR v. JQ [2018] ECLI:EU:C:2018:696, 77, 257

  • Case C-684/16, Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften e.V. v. Tetsuji Shimizu [2018] ECLI:EU:C:2018:874, 77

  • Case C-311/18, Data Protection Commissioner v. Facebook Ireland Limited and Maximillian Schrems, ECLI:EU:C:2020:559, 293

  • Case C-345/17, Sergejs Buivids v Datu valsts inspekcija [2019] ECLI:EU:C:2019:122, 286

  • Case C-176/12, Association de médiation sociale v. Union locale des syndicats CGT and Others [2014] ECLI:EU:C:2014:2, 77

  • Joined Cases C-236/08 to C-238/08, Google France SARL and Google Inc. v. Louis Vuitton Malletier SA (C-236/08), Google France SARL v. Viaticum SA and Luteciel SARL (C-237/08) and Google France SARL v. Centre national de recherche en relations humaines (CNRRH) SARL and Others (C-238/08) [2010] EU:C:2010:159, 60

  • Joined Cases C-569/16 and C-570/16, Stadt Wuppertal and Volker Willmeroth als Inhaber der TWI Technische Wartung und Instandsetzung Volker Willmeroth e.K. v. Maria Elisabeth Bauer and Martina Broßonn [2018] ECLI:EU:C:2018:871, 77

  • Joined cases C-92/09 and C-93/09, Volker und Markus Schecke GbR and Hartmut Eifert v. Land Hessen [2010] ECR I-11063, 290

  • Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12, Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and Others and Kärntner Landesregierung and Others, [2014] ECLI:EU:C:2014:238, 292

  • Joint Cases C-569/16 and C-570/16, Stadt Wuppertal v Maria Elisabeth Bauer and Volker Willmeroth v Martina Broßonn [2018] ECLI:EU:C:2018:871, 257

Inter-American Court of Human Rights

  • Perozo et al. v. Venezuela, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of 28 January 2009, Series C No. 195, 221

  • Ríos et al. v. Venezuela, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of 28 January 2009, Series C n° 194, 221

Domestic Court Decisions

Canada

  • Carter v. B.C. Federation of Foster Parent Assn. [2005] BCCA 398, 76

  • Cool World Technologies Inc. v. Twitter Inc. [2022] ONSC 7156, 76

  • Pritchard v. Van Nes [2016] BCSC 686, 76

  • RWDSU v. Dolphin Delivery Ltd. [1986] 2 SCR 573, 69

France

  • Civil Court Paris, Frédéric X / Facebook, 15/03/2018, n° 12/12401, 257

  • Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris, Ligue contre le racisme et l’antisémitisme et Union des étudiants juifs de France c. Yahoo! Inc. et Société Yahoo! France, RG 05308 (2000), 72

  • Yahoo!, Inc., v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme Et L’antisemitisme, 169 F. Supp. 2d 1181 (N.D.Cal.2001), 72

Germany

  • German Federal Court of Justice, II ZR 192/20, III ZR 179/20, 29 July 2021, 257

Ireland

  • Foley v. Sunday Newspapers Ltd [2005] IEHC 14, 85

  • Muwema v. Facebook Ireland Limited [2018] IECA 104, 85

US

  • Abrams v. United States, 250 US 616 (1919), 249, 323

  • Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 US 234 (2002), 248

  • Boos v. Barry, 485 US 312 (1988), 71

  • Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969), 71, 249

  • The Civil Rights Cases, 109 US 3 (1883), 69

  • Dipp-Paz v. Facebook, No. 18-CV-9037, WL 3205842 (SDNY 2019), 73

  • Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 US 578 (1987), 249

  • FAN v. Facebook, 18-CV-07041-LHK, 20 July 2019, 256

  • Federal Agency of News LLC v. Facebook, Inc., 395 F. Supp. 3d 1295 (ND Cal 2019), 73

  • Gonzalez v. Google LLC, 598 US 617 (2023), 73

  • Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., 593 US 1 (2021), 86

  • Kingsley Int’l Pictures Corp. v. Regents, 360 US 684 (1959), 71

  • Knight First Amendment Inst. at Columbia Univ. v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-5205 (SDNY) No. 18-1691 (2d Cir.), 58

  • Kyllo v. US, 533 US 27 (2001), 291

  • Matal v. Tam, 582 US 218 (2017), 246

  • New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 US 254 (1964), 220

  • Police Dept. v. Mosley, 408 US 92 (1972), 71

  • R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 US 377 (1992), 71

  • Reno v. ACLU, 521 US 844 (1997), 72

  • Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 US 1 (1948), 70

  • Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of New York State Crime Victims Board, 502 US 105 (1991), 71

  • Twitter Inc. v. Taamneh, 598 US 471 (2023), 73

  • United States v. Alvarez, 567 US 709, 717–8 (2012), 252

Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

The HTML of this chapter conforms to version 2.0 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic (A) level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.

Structural and Technical Features

ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Table of Cases
  • Edited by Tiina Pajuste, Tallinn University
  • Book: Human Rights in the Digital Domain
  • Online publication: 24 October 2025
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Table of Cases
  • Edited by Tiina Pajuste, Tallinn University
  • Book: Human Rights in the Digital Domain
  • Online publication: 24 October 2025
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Table of Cases
  • Edited by Tiina Pajuste, Tallinn University
  • Book: Human Rights in the Digital Domain
  • Online publication: 24 October 2025
Available formats
×