ECHR 4 July 2023, Hurbain v. Belgium , no. 57292/16
"255. In light of the foregoing, the Court notes that the national courts consistently took into account the nature and seriousness of the judicial facts reported in the contested article, its lack of topicality or historical or scientific interest, and G.'s lack of notoriety. Moreover, they attached importance to the serious harm suffered by G. as a result of the contested article being kept freely available online, which is likely to create a virtual criminal record, particularly in view of the time that had elapsed since the publication of the original article. Furthermore, after an examination of the possible measures for balancing the rights at issue, an examination the scope of which corresponded to the procedural standards in force in Belgium, they concluded that the contested anonymisation did not constitute an exorbitant and excessive burden for the applicant, while representing, for G., the most effective measure for the protection of his private life.
256. In these circumstances and taking into account the margin of appreciation available to States, the Court concludes that the domestic courts carefully carried out a balancing of the rights at issue in accordance with the requirements of the Convention, so that the interference with the right guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention resulting from the anonymisation of the article in its electronic version appearing on the website of the newspaper Le Soir was reduced to what was strictly necessary and can therefore, in the circumstances of the case, be regarded as necessary in a democratic society and proportionate. It therefore sees no serious reasons for substituting its opinion for that of the domestic courts and for setting aside the result of the balancing exercise carried out by them.
257.Therefore, there has been no violation of Article 10 of the Convention."
