TY - JOUR
T1 - On the distinction between statements of fact and value judgments
T2 - A comment on Petrenco v. Moldova
AU - Stratilatis, Costas
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Taking as its point of departure the judgment of the ECtHR in the case of Petrenco v. Moldova, this article, written in 2010, provides a review of the distinction between statements of fact and value judgments, which is one of the standards which are used by the ECtHR in order to strike a "fair balance" between freedom of speech and of the press, on the one hand, and protection of personality, as an aspect of the right to protection of private life, on the other hand.
AB - Taking as its point of departure the judgment of the ECtHR in the case of Petrenco v. Moldova, this article, written in 2010, provides a review of the distinction between statements of fact and value judgments, which is one of the standards which are used by the ECtHR in order to strike a "fair balance" between freedom of speech and of the press, on the one hand, and protection of personality, as an aspect of the right to protection of private life, on the other hand.
KW - Freedom of expression, European Convention of Human Rights, value judgments, statements of facts
UR - https://www.academia.edu/29012397/On_the_distinction_between_statements_of_fact_and_value_judgments_A_comment_on_Petrenco_v._Moldova
M3 - Article
SN - 1790-7624
VL - VIII
SP - 725
EP - 749
JO - Annuaire International des Droits de l’Homme
JF - Annuaire International des Droits de l’Homme
ER -