Information Note on the Court’s case-law 29

April 2001

O.V.R. v. Russia (dec.) - 44319/98

Decision 3.4.2001 [Section III]

Article 11

Article 11-1

Freedom of association

Obligation to belong to notary association in order to be allowed to practise as private notary: inadmissible

The applicant was authorised by the authorities to open her own private notary practice. In order to comply with the Notary Act which provides that private practising notaries should become members of a notary association, the applicant applied for membership of such an association. She withdrew her application after having been informed that membership was subject to the payment of a fe e which she deemed unacceptably high. As a result, the notary association requested the City Court to divest her of the right to practise as a private notary. The City Court issued an interim decision whereby she was prevented from practising until her cas e was decided on the merits. She appealed to the Regional Court, which quashed the interim decision and referred the case back to the City Court. The proceedings were adjourned to allow the Constitutional Court to examine the constitutionality of the impug ned provisions of the Notary Act. However, the City Court reopened the proceedings before the Constitutional Court’s decision and suspended the applicant’s right to practise. On the applicant’s appeal, the Regional Court adjourned the proceedings pending t he Constitutional Court’s decision. The Constitutional Court finally held that the compulsory membership of the notary association was not unconstitutional. Consequently the Regional Court confirmed the City Court’s decision suspending the applicant’s righ t to practise as a private notary.

Inadmissible under Article 11: Regulatory bodies of the liberal professions are not associations within the meaning of this provision; their object is to regulate and promote the professions while exercising at the same t ime important public law functions for the protection of the public. They remain integrated within the structures of the State and therefore cannot be compared to trade unions. In view of the Notary Act and the statutory functions of the notary chambers, i t appears that these chambers cannot be considered as association within the meaning of Article 11. Moreover, it has not been established that the applicant was prevented from forming or joining an association which would have promoted her professional int erests. Her complaint thus falls outside the scope of Article 11: incompatible ratione materiae .

© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.

Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes