Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Art 10 • Freedom of expression • Unjustified disciplinary sanctioning of lawyer for unethical conduct for notifying a commission of a criminal offence by a prosecutor without a proper basis in fact, moderation, proportionality and caution • Disciplinary courts� failure to give relevant and sufficient reasons for decision • Margin of appreciation overstepped
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 � 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
��������� Marko Bo�njak , President , ��������� P�ter Paczolay, ��������� Krzysztof Wojtyczek, ��������� Alena Pol�čkov�, ��������� Erik Wennerstr�m, ��������� Ioannis Ktistakis, ��������� Davor Derenčinović , judges , and Renata Degener, Section Registrar,
the application (no. 5420/16) against the Republic of Poland lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (�the Convention�) by a Polish national, Mr Rafał Rogalski (�the applicant�), on 16 January 2016;
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.