Scholarlink

<p>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 <i>Heinisch v. Germany</i> to <i>Boronyák v. Hungary</i>, including <i>Bucur</i>, <i>Matúz</i>, <i>Gawlik</i>, <i>Aghajanyan</i>, and <i>Halet</i>. It explores the six-part whistleblower test formulated in <i>Guja v. Moldova</i>, and explores challenges posed by loyalty duties, chilling effects, and digital-age risks, situating Strasbourg’s approach within broader European whistleblower protection frameworks.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Business confidentiality and freedom of expression – the evolving jurisprudence of the Strasbourg court

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月24日

查看全文
  • János Tamás Papp

摘要

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.