![]() Thus, at the end of 2019, the plaintiff was invited to write a column in the well-known Serbian weekly magazine NIN, in which he pointed out from a professional point of view that the city government spent far more money on the reconstruction of the main square in Belgrade than the real market value for performed works was. He has been retired for many years and is not involved in politics, but as an expert in the field of construction and maintenance of roads and highways, he is often invited to comment on issues considering construction projects related to the construction of roads, squares and the like. The Court also noted that the online article did not contribute to a debate of general interest since the impugned statements were not directed at the work of the plaintiff as a public office holder.Īlmost two decades ago, Milan Savić (the plaintiff) was the managing director of a utility company that deals with the construction and maintenance of roads and highways in Belgrade, the capital of Serbia. The Court primarily based its decision on the fact that the internet portal did not act in accordance with journalistic due diligence standards since its coverage was biased in favor of the city councilor, and it failed to represent both sides of the story or verify the relevant information. The Portal had reported a statement made by one of the city councilors in Belgrade in which he called the plaintiff “a pest columnist ” and “a thief ” and falsely claimed that the plaintiff was sentenced to prison in 2005 for corruption. The Court of Appeal in Belgrade affirmed the judgment of the Higher Court in Belgrade, holding that the internet portal Informer.rs damaged the plaintiff’s reputation and honor. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
March 2023
Categories |