Mr.Rothe complained that the national courts’ refusal to order him a compensation in respect of the publication of the article and photographs violated his right to private life.

The Court ruled that the public interest into publication prevailed over Mr.Rothe’s right to private life and accordingly there had been no violation of this right.

The Court balanced the freedom of expression of the publisher against the right to private life of the applicant and found that the publication of the photographs showed an intimate moment of the applicant’s life. 

However:

• The article and photo contributed to a debate of general interest as it concerned activities of major religious group and the applicant had an influential role in the Church.
• The pictures were not made using illicit means.
• The applicant had a possibility to challenge the lawfulness of the publication under other Austrian law provisions but he chose not to do so.