Business confidentiality and freedom of expression The evolving jurisprudence of the Strasbourg court /

This article examines the European Court of Human Rights’ evolving jurisprudence on balancing business confidentiality and freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It analyses key judgments from Heinisch v. Germany to Boronyák v. Hungary , including Bucur ,...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Papp János Tamás
Format: Article
Published: 2025
Series:ERA FORUM
doi:10.1007/s12027-025-00846-8

mtmt:36208528
Online Access:https://publikacio.ppke.hu/2767

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000 i 4500
001 publ2767
005 20251028091810.0
008 251028s2025 hu o 0|| Angol d
022 |a 1612-3093 
024 7 |a 10.1007/s12027-025-00846-8  |2 doi 
024 7 |a 36208528  |2 mtmt 
040 |a PPKE Publikáció Repozitórium  |b hun 
041 |a Angol 
100 1 |a Papp János Tamás 
245 1 0 |a Business confidentiality and freedom of expression   |h [elektronikus dokumentum] :  |b The evolving jurisprudence of the Strasbourg court /  |c  Papp János Tamás 
260 |c 2025 
490 0 |a ERA FORUM 
520 3 |a This article examines the European Court of Human Rights’ evolving jurisprudence on balancing business confidentiality and freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It analyses key judgments from Heinisch v. Germany to Boronyák v. Hungary , including Bucur , Matúz , Gawlik , Aghajanyan , and Halet . It explores the six-part whistleblower test formulated in Guja v. Moldova , and explores challenges posed by loyalty duties, chilling effects, and digital-age risks, situating Strasbourg’s approach within broader European whistleblower protection frameworks. 
856 4 0 |u https://publikacio.ppke.hu/id/eprint/2767/1/Papp_Business_confidentiality_and_freedom_of_expression.pdf  |z Dokumentum-elérés