CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 septembre 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s54AB6003 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 19 January 2015 and 19 January 2015   Published on 21 September 2020     FIRST SECTION Application no. 38940/13 Andrzej BUDA against Poland lodged on 16 May 2013     The facts and complaints in this application have been summarised in the Court’s Statement of facts and Questions to the parties, which is available in HUDOC. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention (cf. Axel Springer AG v.   Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, 7 February 2012; Von Hannover v.   Germany (no. 2) [GC], nos. 40660/08 and 60641/08, ECHR 2012)? In addition to the judgments given in the case instituted by the applicant against the internet portal, reference is made to the Supreme Court’s judgment of 8 March 2012 (no. V CSK 109/11) and the Wroclaw Court of Appeal’s judgment of 29 June 2012 (no. I ACa 631/12) given in the case instituted by the applicant against T.B.