lawyer

decisions, applied to the evaluation of a by Article. 5 Abs. 1 Set 1 socialize as harmful to minors adverse legal consequences GG protected expression, must take into account the value-setting significance of the fundamental right of freedom of expression. These principles are also to be observed, if not the expression itself is the subject of proceedings, but their evaluation is in turn the basis for a more onerous state measure. As far as making a classification of utterances as "harmful to minors" the basis for the finable requirement to appoint a youth protection officer, must also be considered as part of the proportionality test, the importance of having such a requirement for the possibility of freedom of expression of those affected. This has the 2nd Chamber of the First Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court today ...

LG Frankfurt 15. Civil Appeal from the 24.07.2020 to Az 2-15 S 187/19, 32 C 3091/19 (48) The obligation of the board member of an association according to § 27 Abs. 3 S. 1 i.V.m. § 667 BGB includes the administration rights to a Facebook page, which the board member, albeit due to the system, using a private account, on behalf of the association for this. first AG Frankfurt am Main, 18. November 2019, 32 C 3091/19 (48), Judgment …

The applicant is users of the Inter platform facebook. He commented in the past two to three years in at least a hundred cases, among other posts from politicians and the media with the sentence: "Refugees: interned for as long, until they voluntarily leave the country!“. until 28. More 2018 this sentence remained on facebook unopposed. On the night of 29. More 2018 deleted facebook this post, because it was contrary to their community standards, especially against their standards of "hate speech". In addition, Facebook blocked the applicant for thirty days from all activities. The claimant in the way of interlocutory, to prohibit facebook, To delete the quoted comment or to .. him because of this commentary on facebook.