Complaint about media report on wedding of well-known TV presenter:
inadmissible
In its decision in the case of Sihler-Jauch and Jauch v. Germany (application nos. 68273/10 and
34194/11) the European Court of Human Rights has unanimously declared the application
inadmissible. The decision is final.
The case concerned the publication of an article in the German weekly magazine Bunte about the
wedding of a well-known TV presenter, and his and his wife’s unsuccessful attempts before the
German courts to obtain damages.
The Court rejected the applicants’ complaints about the German courts’ decisions as manifestly ill
founded, concluding that those courts had carefully balanced the applicants’ right to respect for
their private life with the magazine’s right to freedom of expression.
Principal facts
The applicants, Dorothea Sihler-Jauch and Günther Jauch, are German nationals who were born in
1958 and 1956 respectively and live in Potsdam (Germany). Mr Jauch is a well-known journalist,
producer and TV presenter.
In July 2006, the applicants married. The ceremony and reception took place in a church and an
ancient palace in Potsdam, both of them well-known tourist attractions. The wedding was attended
by 180 guests, including the mayor of Berlin. Although the applicants’ lawyer had informed the press
beforehand that the couple did not wish for any reports about details of the wedding to be
published, the magazine Bunte published an article after the wedding which was illustrated by
several photographs, including one photograph of the bride taken shortly before the ceremony, and
gave details such as the nature of the catering and quotes from the speeches.
Ms Sihler-Jauch obtained an injunction, issued by the Berlin Regional Court in August 2006, against
any further publication of the photograph of her on the wedding day. She also brought proceedings
against the magazine, claiming, in particular, 250,000 euros (EUR) as a notional licence fee for the
report and EUR 75,000 in damages. In January 2008 the Hamburg Regional Court awarded her EUR
25,000 in damages, finding that the article had violated her personality rights, but rejected the claim
for the licence fee. In October 2008 the Hamburg Court of Appeal set the judgment aside and
dismissed the action, holding in particular that, owing to the influence of Mr Jauch and his role as a
presenter in TV shows on political issues, the public had a legitimate interest in the wedding which
could not be outweighed by the applicants’ wish for privacy. In May 2010 the Federal Constitutional
Court declined to admit Ms Sihler-Jauch’s constitutional complaint.
In parallel proceedings, Mr Jauch also made a claim for damages, which was rejected by the courts.
Complaints, procedure and composition of the Court
The applications were lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 16 November 2010 and
26 May 2011 respectively.
Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on
Human Rights, the applicants complained that their privacy had been insufficiently protected by the
domestic courts. They further relied on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the