Search results : 119
Refine your searchIRIS 2021-7:1/22 European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber): Centrum för Rättvisa v. Sweden | |
---|---|
In a judgment of 19 June 2018, the Third Section Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found that the bulk interception of electronic signals in Sweden for foreign intelligence purposes, on the basis of Swedish Signals Intelligence Act, did not violate the right to privacy and correspondence under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), nor the right to an effective remedy under Article 13 ECHR (see IRIS 2018-8/3). After referral, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR in its judgment of 25 May 2021 came to the final conclusion that the Swedish bulk interception regime... |
|
IRIS 2021-7:1/26 European Commission: Decision to suspend broadcast of Rossiya RTR in Latvia compatible with AVMS Directive | |
On 7 May 2021, the European Commission delivered an important decision, finding that the Latvian National Electronic Mass Media Council’s 12-month suspension of the television channel Rossiya RTR in Latvia, due to incitement to violence or hatred, was compatible with the EU’s Audiovisual Media Service Directive (AVMDS). This follows a recent EU Court of Justice judgment on restricting transmissions of broadcasts from other EU member states on the basis of incitement to hatred (IRIS 2019-8/3), and earlier European Commission decisions on this issue (see IRIS 2018-7/7 and IRIS 2017-6/5).... |
|
IRIS 2018-8:1/3 European Court of Human Rights: Centrum för Rättvisa v. Sweden | |
According to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the Swedish law permitting the bulk interception of electronic signals in Sweden for foreign intelligence purposes does not violate the right to privacy and correspondence under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The ECtHR reached this conclusion after a Swedish human rights not-for-profit organisation, Centrum för Rättvisa (“the Centrum”), lodged a complaint with the Strasbourg Court, alleging that Swedish legislation and practice in the field of signals intelligence violated and continued to violate its privacy... |
|
IRIS 2018-4:1/8 European Commission: Imposing Swedish ban on alcohol advertising on two UK broadcasters is not compatible with EU law | |
On 31 January 2018, the European Commission decided that Sweden’s intention to impose a ban on alcohol advertising on two UK-based broadcasters that target mainly Swedish audiences is not compatible with EU law. This is the first Commission decision to be based on Article 4 of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2010/13/EU) (AVMSD). Under the AVMSD, the laws applicable to a broadcaster are determined on the basis of the country-of-origin principle. According to this principle, a broadcaster must comply only with the rules of the EU member state in which it is established, even if it broadcasts... |
|
IRIS 2018-3:1/30 [SE] Domain names can be classified as property that can be seized | |
On 22 December 2017, the Swedish Supreme Court announced that the appeal on the decision to seize The Pirate Bays (“TPB”) Swedish domain names would not be granted a probationary permit, meaning that the Swedish Court of Appeal’s decision would remain unchanged. The legal proceeding against the Swedish domain organisation Punkt SE (ISS) was initiated in April 2015, when the Swedish prosecutor filed a complaint with the objective of hindering access to TPB through their Swedish domain names. “Thepiratebay.se” and “Piratebay.se” were both used for the illegal file sharing of copyright-protected works. The... |