Suchergebnisse

THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PRINCIPE OF PROPORTIONALITY IN THE PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE SUMMARY The topic of this thesis is: the interpretation of the principle of proportionality pursuant to the practice of the European Court of Justice. It discusses the very beginning of this principle and its establishment in the law of the European Union: from the 1951 Treaty of Paris to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. The European Court of Justice explains the principle of proportionality as a concept of justice. The Court uses this principle's criteria, which are sometimes also called a test of proportionality, in its practice. These criteria demand that suitable measures, necessary in settling the disputes that arise in the European Union, are used in the pursuance of lawful aims. The use of the principle of proportionality occupies a special place in evaluating the behaviour of the member states when they operate at the limits of Community law and when national measures, which the Consolidated Treaty of the European Union grants and allows them to use, are debated. The use of these national measures restricts the exercise of the freedoms of contract, i.e. the free movement of services, goods, people, and capital. By interpreting and following the principle of proportionality in the practice of the European Court of Justice, the granted freedoms are guaranteed and the behaviour of the states evaluated in pursuing the set aims of the European Union. The aim of this thesis is, on the basis of the practice of the European Court of Justice, to reveal the content of the principle of proportionality and the specifics of its use as well as to discuss each specific freedom granted by the European Union in its proper context.

THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PRINCIPE OF PROPORTIONALITY IN THE PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE SUMMARY The topic of this thesis is: the interpretation of the principle of proportionality pursuant to the practice of the European Court of Justice. It discusses the very beginning of this principle and its establishment in the law of the European Union: from the 1951 Treaty of Paris to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. The European Court of Justice explains the principle of proportionality as a concept of justice. The Court uses this principle's criteria, which are sometimes also called a test of proportionality, in its practice. These criteria demand that suitable measures, necessary in settling the disputes that arise in the European Union, are used in the pursuance of lawful aims. The use of the principle of proportionality occupies a special place in evaluating the behaviour of the member states when they operate at the limits of Community law and when national measures, which the Consolidated Treaty of the European Union grants and allows them to use, are debated. The use of these national measures restricts the exercise of the freedoms of contract, i.e. the free movement of services, goods, people, and capital. By interpreting and following the principle of proportionality in the practice of the European Court of Justice, the granted freedoms are guaranteed and the behaviour of the states evaluated in pursuing the set aims of the European Union. The aim of this thesis is, on the basis of the practice of the European Court of Justice, to reveal the content of the principle of proportionality and the specifics of its use as well as to discuss each specific freedom granted by the European Union in its proper context.

There are analysed content and implementation problems of constitutional principle of freedom to choose a job in final master work. Constitutional Court of Lithuania noted that constitutional freedom to choose a job or a business is essential condition to supply vital demands of person and to secure position in society and suppose a duty for legislator to make legal presumption to implement mentioned freedom. Principle of freedom to choose a job takes important place both in international and national law. Content of principle of freedom to choose a job is made of right to choose a job or a business freely and right to agree to work freely. Freedom to choose a job or a business means every person has a right to choose a job by his capabilities and intentions and in that freely choose way to earn for living. Right to choose a job also means that person is free both to work and not to work or for example to have his own business or to live from his savings. Practise of right to choose a job is not absolute and not guarantee that a person will get a job which he wants. Law acts, collective agreements, rules of legal procedure and contracts of parts of employer and employee can determine restrictions of right to choose a job or a business. Estimating restrictions of right to choose a job or a business important is to make sure that it was made by law act, also that it was made on purpose to protect other persons rights and liberties and values consolidated in Constitution; also that these restrictions do not deny nature and essence of these rights and liberties and it was followed principle of proportionality. Right to agree to work freely means that no one can be forced to work. Right to agree to work freely is closely connected to interdiction of forced and compulsory work. Right to agree to work freely penetrates both right to refuse a job and right to have a security from changing a labour contract ex-parte and finally interdict for employer to demand to renew labour intercourse.

There are analysed content and implementation problems of constitutional principle of freedom to choose a job in final master work. Constitutional Court of Lithuania noted that constitutional freedom to choose a job or a business is essential condition to supply vital demands of person and to secure position in society and suppose a duty for legislator to make legal presumption to implement mentioned freedom. Principle of freedom to choose a job takes important place both in international and national law. Content of principle of freedom to choose a job is made of right to choose a job or a business freely and right to agree to work freely. Freedom to choose a job or a business means every person has a right to choose a job by his capabilities and intentions and in that freely choose way to earn for living. Right to choose a job also means that person is free both to work and not to work or for example to have his own business or to live from his savings. Practise of right to choose a job is not absolute and not guarantee that a person will get a job which he wants. Law acts, collective agreements, rules of legal procedure and contracts of parts of employer and employee can determine restrictions of right to choose a job or a business. Estimating restrictions of right to choose a job or a business important is to make sure that it was made by law act, also that it was made on purpose to protect other persons rights and liberties and values consolidated in Constitution; also that these restrictions do not deny nature and essence of these rights and liberties and it was followed principle of proportionality. Right to agree to work freely means that no one can be forced to work. Right to agree to work freely is closely connected to interdiction of forced and compulsory work. Right to agree to work freely penetrates both right to refuse a job and right to have a security from changing a labour contract ex-parte and finally interdict for employer to demand to renew labour intercourse.

Approximately 150 countries of the world have already introduced the value added tax in their tax systems. Value added tax compose a significant portion of the income of the revenue of these states' (statistically one fifth). As the main reasons which determined the unprecedented popularity of VAT and its rapid integration into the tax systems of the most countries of the world are recognized the meaningful disadvantages of the alternative turnover tax systems, which are not typical to the systems of VAT. The uniqueness of value added tax and its advantage over the other turnover taxes lies in the mechanism of input VAT deduction. Certain mechanism allows to charge only the value added created in the stages of distribution (no cascade effect emerges). Therefore in order for VAT to operate effectively and to remain neutral, it is particularly important that taxable persons' right to input VAT deduction is either not restricted at all, or if restricted then only in exceptional cases and only in the strict proportionality with the objectives in purpose. For the above reasons we examine the problem whether the provisions of the Lithuanian Law on VAT which entitle solely the VAT payers with the right to VAT deduction legitimately restrict the taxable persons' right to deduct input VAT incurred and absorbed in the taxable activity prior the registration as VAT payer. As the initial starting position we hypothesize that conceivably the provisions of the Lithuanian Law on VAT, restricting the taxable person's right to deduct input VAT, incurred and absorbed in the taxable activity prior the registration as VAT payer, unduly implement the requirements of the Directive 2006/112/EC. The subject of the Master's work is the relation between the right to VAT deduction and the obligation to register as VAT payer is concretized by the subject-matter which is defined as the conformity of the provisions of the Law on VAT, restricting the taxable person's right to deduct input VAT, incurred and absorbed in the taxable activity prior the registration as VAT payer, with the nature of the system of value added tax and to the law of European Union. In this work we establish the objective to reveal the nature of the value added tax via the prism of the historic evolution of turnover taxes and to evaluate the conformity of the provisions of the Lithuanian Law on VAT, restricting the taxable person's right to VAT deduction, by the obligation to register as VAT payers, with the law of European Union. The following methods are applied in this work: 1) method of historical review, 2) method of analogy, 3) method of comparison, 4) method of logical deduction, 5) method of systematic analysis, 6) method of legislation and case law analysis and others. In the conclusions of the Final Master's work it is stated that the established hypothesis was confirmed – the provisions of Law on VAT, restricting the taxable person's right to deduct input VAT incurred and absorbed in the taxable activity prior the registration as VAT payer, do indeed unduly implement the requirements of the Directive. According to the conclusions made we suggest to stipulate in the Law on VAT the provision that the taxable persons which incurred input VAT prior the registration as the VAT payers are entitled to register for VAT purposes retrospectively. The structure of the Final Master's work is comprised of the introduction, enunciation part (3 chapters), conclusions and suggestions, list of literature, annotation (both in Lithuanian and English) and summary (both in Lithuanian and English).

Approximately 150 countries of the world have already introduced the value added tax in their tax systems. Value added tax compose a significant portion of the income of the revenue of these states' (statistically one fifth). As the main reasons which determined the unprecedented popularity of VAT and its rapid integration into the tax systems of the most countries of the world are recognized the meaningful disadvantages of the alternative turnover tax systems, which are not typical to the systems of VAT. The uniqueness of value added tax and its advantage over the other turnover taxes lies in the mechanism of input VAT deduction. Certain mechanism allows to charge only the value added created in the stages of distribution (no cascade effect emerges). Therefore in order for VAT to operate effectively and to remain neutral, it is particularly important that taxable persons' right to input VAT deduction is either not restricted at all, or if restricted then only in exceptional cases and only in the strict proportionality with the objectives in purpose. For the above reasons we examine the problem whether the provisions of the Lithuanian Law on VAT which entitle solely the VAT payers with the right to VAT deduction legitimately restrict the taxable persons' right to deduct input VAT incurred and absorbed in the taxable activity prior the registration as VAT payer. As the initial starting position we hypothesize that conceivably the provisions of the Lithuanian Law on VAT, restricting the taxable person's right to deduct input VAT, incurred and absorbed in the taxable activity prior the registration as VAT payer, unduly implement the requirements of the Directive 2006/112/EC. The subject of the Master's work is the relation between the right to VAT deduction and the obligation to register as VAT payer is concretized by the subject-matter which is defined as the conformity of the provisions of the Law on VAT, restricting the taxable person's right to deduct input VAT, incurred and absorbed in the taxable activity prior the registration as VAT payer, with the nature of the system of value added tax and to the law of European Union. In this work we establish the objective to reveal the nature of the value added tax via the prism of the historic evolution of turnover taxes and to evaluate the conformity of the provisions of the Lithuanian Law on VAT, restricting the taxable person's right to VAT deduction, by the obligation to register as VAT payers, with the law of European Union. The following methods are applied in this work: 1) method of historical review, 2) method of analogy, 3) method of comparison, 4) method of logical deduction, 5) method of systematic analysis, 6) method of legislation and case law analysis and others. In the conclusions of the Final Master's work it is stated that the established hypothesis was confirmed – the provisions of Law on VAT, restricting the taxable person's right to deduct input VAT incurred and absorbed in the taxable activity prior the registration as VAT payer, do indeed unduly implement the requirements of the Directive. According to the conclusions made we suggest to stipulate in the Law on VAT the provision that the taxable persons which incurred input VAT prior the registration as the VAT payers are entitled to register for VAT purposes retrospectively. The structure of the Final Master's work is comprised of the introduction, enunciation part (3 chapters), conclusions and suggestions, list of literature, annotation (both in Lithuanian and English) and summary (both in Lithuanian and English).

Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights is devoted to the freedom of expression, which includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas. Article 8 of the Convention protects private and family life, home, correspondence of every individual. By implementing one Conventional right a problem of other right's protection often occurs. It is a matter of great relevance while implementing Article 10 of the Convention which very often conflicts with Article 8 of the Convention. The fundamental principle which European Court of Human Rights invokes in his case- law is based on the view that freedom of expression which is guaranteed in Article 10 of the Convention, cannot violate the right to respect for one's private life. European Court of Human Rights has not set down particular limits of the private life's protection and freedom of expression. It means that in each case the Court has to examine the existing situation and its circumstances. So the principle of "interest balance" has to be applied while implementing Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention in practice. It is essential to find the "reasonable balance" and to decide, which right guaranteed under the Convention will have the priority over another in each case. Firstly, the Court has to analyze these criterions: whether the freedom of expression satisfy the public's interest to get particular information about certain facts or situation, whether this public's interest is more important than protection of one's private life, whether publication of certain information is justified under "pressing social needs". That is why it is fundamental to follow the principles of proportionality, respect for one's private life and necessity in democratic society.

Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights is devoted to the freedom of expression, which includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas. Article 8 of the Convention protects private and family life, home, correspondence of every individual. By implementing one Conventional right a problem of other right's protection often occurs. It is a matter of great relevance while implementing Article 10 of the Convention which very often conflicts with Article 8 of the Convention. The fundamental principle which European Court of Human Rights invokes in his case- law is based on the view that freedom of expression which is guaranteed in Article 10 of the Convention, cannot violate the right to respect for one's private life. European Court of Human Rights has not set down particular limits of the private life's protection and freedom of expression. It means that in each case the Court has to examine the existing situation and its circumstances. So the principle of "interest balance" has to be applied while implementing Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention in practice. It is essential to find the "reasonable balance" and to decide, which right guaranteed under the Convention will have the priority over another in each case. Firstly, the Court has to analyze these criterions: whether the freedom of expression satisfy the public's interest to get particular information about certain facts or situation, whether this public's interest is more important than protection of one's private life, whether publication of certain information is justified under "pressing social needs". That is why it is fundamental to follow the principles of proportionality, respect for one's private life and necessity in democratic society.

In the paper the issues of nature and keynote attributes of share, ordinary shares, different types of preference shares, the use and value of voting rights, and types of shares in regard of voting rights attributed to it are discussed. Given that the 'one share – one vote' principle is of fundamental importance in the context of company law, part of this paper is devoted to analysing its rationale and possible legitimacy. The overview of ordinary shares serves in unravelling its nature and the process of comparing ordinary shares with preference shares defines their inherent differences. Different ways in which granting of voting rights can be structured enable the entities concerned to respond to the market forces, however it can also result in negative outcomes to the parties involved in business transactions. Complex share capital structures may in assist the dominant shareholders in exploiting the non-controlling shareholders and empowering them to extract benefits at the expense of the latter. With a view to avoiding such negative outcomes, proper regulation rightly balancing the interests of parties involved should be enforced. In examining voting rights enjoyed by the shareholders, the principle of 'one share – one vote' deserves adequate scrutiny. The opinions as to the necessity of adherence to the proportionality principle are divergent. Although most favour implementation of the principle, strict observance of 'one share – one vote' is not always desirable. The significance of 'one share – one vote' principle can best be witnessed in the context of takeovers. The legal rules and implementation of the principle is related to certain decisions of political and economical nature, for it does not solely depend on the need to protect the interests of the weaker party, but also have to measure its possible effects on competitiveness and structure of the market. In the European Union the principle of 'one share – one vote' is provided for in the Takeover Directive in a form of an optional breakthrough rule. Since the common approach to essential company law rules on the European level has not been reached, the present-day breakthrough rule is not able to attain the objectives initially sought by the harmonization. As the mainstream authors point out, the effect of the breakrought rule is likely to be insignificant.

In the paper the issues of nature and keynote attributes of share, ordinary shares, different types of preference shares, the use and value of voting rights, and types of shares in regard of voting rights attributed to it are discussed. Given that the 'one share – one vote' principle is of fundamental importance in the context of company law, part of this paper is devoted to analysing its rationale and possible legitimacy. The overview of ordinary shares serves in unravelling its nature and the process of comparing ordinary shares with preference shares defines their inherent differences. Different ways in which granting of voting rights can be structured enable the entities concerned to respond to the market forces, however it can also result in negative outcomes to the parties involved in business transactions. Complex share capital structures may in assist the dominant shareholders in exploiting the non-controlling shareholders and empowering them to extract benefits at the expense of the latter. With a view to avoiding such negative outcomes, proper regulation rightly balancing the interests of parties involved should be enforced. In examining voting rights enjoyed by the shareholders, the principle of 'one share – one vote' deserves adequate scrutiny. The opinions as to the necessity of adherence to the proportionality principle are divergent. Although most favour implementation of the principle, strict observance of 'one share – one vote' is not always desirable. The significance of 'one share – one vote' principle can best be witnessed in the context of takeovers. The legal rules and implementation of the principle is related to certain decisions of political and economical nature, for it does not solely depend on the need to protect the interests of the weaker party, but also have to measure its possible effects on competitiveness and structure of the market. In the European Union the principle of 'one share – one vote' is provided for in the Takeover Directive in a form of an optional breakthrough rule. Since the common approach to essential company law rules on the European level has not been reached, the present-day breakthrough rule is not able to attain the objectives initially sought by the harmonization. As the mainstream authors point out, the effect of the breakrought rule is likely to be insignificant.

Every person is entitled to judicial protection. Judicial consideration of a civil dispute usually begins by initiation of civil proceedings and ends up with the due enforcement of a court judgment. Consideration of a civil case continues for a certain period of time. Sometimes by reason of defendant's bad faith the due enforcement of a judgment may become difficult or even impossible. For instance, a defendant may assign his property to other persons, conceal it or destroy after becoming aware of legal action instituted against him. The law provides that in case of such risk the court may apply interim measures. The purpose of their application is the due enforcement of a future judgment. Application of interim measures entails placement of certain restrictions on the defendant. Therefore, they shall be applied in accordance with the principles of justice, cost effectiveness and proportionality. Interim measures cannot be applied unreasonably. Real threat for enforcement of a future judgment is a sufficient basis for applying such measures. It is the court that determines as to the existence or otherwise of particular grounds for the application of interim measures in a given case. The court shall consider the plaintiff's application to apply interim measures by means of written procedure. The defendant shall be notified about the consideration of the application. However, in the event of a real threat that such notification may prevent the application of interim measures, the application may be considered without notice to the defendant. The law provides for the right of the plaintiff to apply for interim measures by the date of addressing to court with an action. However, this situation is an exception. In order to maintain the balance of interests of the plaintiff and the defendant, the legislature provides for remedies available to the defendant: the court may require that the plaintiff secures the compensation of loss that may be possibly incurred by the defendant by reason of application of interim measures; a defendant is entitled to appeal against a court order ordering the application of interim measures; a defendant may apply for the annulment of an interim measure after having paid the required amount in the court's special account or after property mortgage or provision of a surety agreement. A court order ordering the application of interim measures shall take effect from the moment of its adoption and shall be subject to immediate enforcement. The order is subject to appeal, however, lodging of a specific complaint shall not suspend the enforcement of that order. Lithuanian courts may also apply interim measures in case a dispute between the parties is subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign court or arbitration tribunal.

Every person is entitled to judicial protection. Judicial consideration of a civil dispute usually begins by initiation of civil proceedings and ends up with the due enforcement of a court judgment. Consideration of a civil case continues for a certain period of time. Sometimes by reason of defendant's bad faith the due enforcement of a judgment may become difficult or even impossible. For instance, a defendant may assign his property to other persons, conceal it or destroy after becoming aware of legal action instituted against him. The law provides that in case of such risk the court may apply interim measures. The purpose of their application is the due enforcement of a future judgment. Application of interim measures entails placement of certain restrictions on the defendant. Therefore, they shall be applied in accordance with the principles of justice, cost effectiveness and proportionality. Interim measures cannot be applied unreasonably. Real threat for enforcement of a future judgment is a sufficient basis for applying such measures. It is the court that determines as to the existence or otherwise of particular grounds for the application of interim measures in a given case. The court shall consider the plaintiff's application to apply interim measures by means of written procedure. The defendant shall be notified about the consideration of the application. However, in the event of a real threat that such notification may prevent the application of interim measures, the application may be considered without notice to the defendant. The law provides for the right of the plaintiff to apply for interim measures by the date of addressing to court with an action. However, this situation is an exception. In order to maintain the balance of interests of the plaintiff and the defendant, the legislature provides for remedies available to the defendant: the court may require that the plaintiff secures the compensation of loss that may be possibly incurred by the defendant by reason of application of interim measures; a defendant is entitled to appeal against a court order ordering the application of interim measures; a defendant may apply for the annulment of an interim measure after having paid the required amount in the court's special account or after property mortgage or provision of a surety agreement. A court order ordering the application of interim measures shall take effect from the moment of its adoption and shall be subject to immediate enforcement. The order is subject to appeal, however, lodging of a specific complaint shall not suspend the enforcement of that order. Lithuanian courts may also apply interim measures in case a dispute between the parties is subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign court or arbitration tribunal.

Every person is entitled to judicial protection. Judicial consideration of a civil dispute usually begins by initiation of civil proceedings and ends up with the due enforcement of a court judgment. Consideration of a civil case continues for a certain period of time. Sometimes by reason of defendant's bad faith the due enforcement of a judgment may become difficult or even impossible. For instance, a defendant may assign his property to other persons, conceal it or destroy after becoming aware of legal action instituted against him. The law provides that in case of such risk the court may apply interim measures. The purpose of their application is the due enforcement of a future judgment. Application of interim measures entails placement of certain restrictions on the defendant. Therefore, they shall be applied in accordance with the principles of justice, cost effectiveness and proportionality. Interim measures cannot be applied unreasonably. Real threat for enforcement of a future judgment is a sufficient basis for applying such measures. It is the court that determines as to the existence or otherwise of particular grounds for the application of interim measures in a given case. The court shall consider the plaintiff's application to apply interim measures by means of written procedure. The defendant shall be notified about the consideration of the application. However, in the event of a real threat that such notification may prevent the application of interim measures, the application may be considered without notice to the defendant. The law provides for the right of the plaintiff to apply for interim measures by the date of addressing to court with an action. However, this situation is an exception. In order to maintain the balance of interests of the plaintiff and the defendant, the legislature provides for remedies available to the defendant: the court may require that the plaintiff secures the compensation of loss that may be possibly incurred by the defendant by reason of application of interim measures; a defendant is entitled to appeal against a court order ordering the application of interim measures; a defendant may apply for the annulment of an interim measure after having paid the required amount in the court's special account or after property mortgage or provision of a surety agreement. A court order ordering the application of interim measures shall take effect from the moment of its adoption and shall be subject to immediate enforcement. The order is subject to appeal, however, lodging of a specific complaint shall not suspend the enforcement of that order. Lithuanian courts may also apply interim measures in case a dispute between the parties is subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign court or arbitration tribunal.

Every person is entitled to judicial protection. Judicial consideration of a civil dispute usually begins by initiation of civil proceedings and ends up with the due enforcement of a court judgment. Consideration of a civil case continues for a certain period of time. Sometimes by reason of defendant's bad faith the due enforcement of a judgment may become difficult or even impossible. For instance, a defendant may assign his property to other persons, conceal it or destroy after becoming aware of legal action instituted against him. The law provides that in case of such risk the court may apply interim measures. The purpose of their application is the due enforcement of a future judgment. Application of interim measures entails placement of certain restrictions on the defendant. Therefore, they shall be applied in accordance with the principles of justice, cost effectiveness and proportionality. Interim measures cannot be applied unreasonably. Real threat for enforcement of a future judgment is a sufficient basis for applying such measures. It is the court that determines as to the existence or otherwise of particular grounds for the application of interim measures in a given case. The court shall consider the plaintiff's application to apply interim measures by means of written procedure. The defendant shall be notified about the consideration of the application. However, in the event of a real threat that such notification may prevent the application of interim measures, the application may be considered without notice to the defendant. The law provides for the right of the plaintiff to apply for interim measures by the date of addressing to court with an action. However, this situation is an exception. In order to maintain the balance of interests of the plaintiff and the defendant, the legislature provides for remedies available to the defendant: the court may require that the plaintiff secures the compensation of loss that may be possibly incurred by the defendant by reason of application of interim measures; a defendant is entitled to appeal against a court order ordering the application of interim measures; a defendant may apply for the annulment of an interim measure after having paid the required amount in the court's special account or after property mortgage or provision of a surety agreement. A court order ordering the application of interim measures shall take effect from the moment of its adoption and shall be subject to immediate enforcement. The order is subject to appeal, however, lodging of a specific complaint shall not suspend the enforcement of that order. Lithuanian courts may also apply interim measures in case a dispute between the parties is subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign court or arbitration tribunal.

Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights is devoted for the protection and respect of family and private life. Talking about family life, it is important to say that the definition of it have evolved for years creating more and more legal issues. The Court has considered the family to include husband and wife and children who are dependent on them, including illegitimate and adopted children. It seems that de facto family ties can arise where parties are living together outside marriage and children born out of such relationships form part of the family unit from the moment of birth and by the very fact of it. The family ties exist even where the parents are not living together at the time of the child's birth. In some circumstances, relations with grandparents may be protected under Article 8. More remote relationships are generally not close enough to consti¬tute family relationships protected by Article 8. There is, however, some slender evidence to suggest that a broader view is being taken of what constitutes the family. Engagement does not in itself constitute family life, but the relationship between a prisoner and his fiancee falls within private life. The same is true of transsexuals couples. Implementing one of those rights, arise a violation of other rights, embodied in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. The conflict usually is between articles 8 and 10. The freedom of expression is called as the essential foundations of democratic society. The media has a "public watch dog" function, as it mentioned in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Media has a task to import not only information which is favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also offend, chocked or disturbed information. Society has a right to obtain information about political matters or about matters of public interest. This freedom includes two components: freedom to receive information and freedom to impart them. These rights must be used in a such way that they do not constitute the violation of private life. Under the Convention, right to respect family or private life embodied in the article 8 and freedom of expression embodied in the Article 10 are not absolute. They state some restrictions and limitations. The interference is legitimate when it is necessary in a democratic society, interest of national security, prevention or disorder of crime and other. This is so called negative obligations. The problems of the protection of human rights can arise when the state fails to take such the obligations, for instance to enact some particular law – so called positive obligations. Thus it could the violation not only when the state fails to take positive obligations, but also when such the law trespasses the limit of the proportionality taking negative obligations. The problems about private life are coming out of its changing concept in XXI century. New technologies have vested the society with new instruments and made individuals' lives more convenient. Evolution of technologies and social life enhanced individuals to access to information and knowledge; thus it inevitably may lead to a situation when members of society recognize the right to know, right to communicate, right to express views and contribute to the society as a more vital and valuable than traditional and straightforward "right to be left alone". Legally speaking, of all the European human rights in the international catalogue, privacy is perhaps the most difficult to define and circumscribe. Nowadays, a person has less control on his personal information, because private life and privacy has become less important as to receive information and freedom to impart it. What's why Europe and all the world confronts with big problems of violation of human rights in context of the protection of personal data The solution of these problems could be self regulation and legislation of various legal acts.