Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

KHURAL NEWSPAPER AND ZEYNALOV v. AZERBAIJAN

Doc ref: 383/12 • ECHR ID: 001-198320

Document date: October 11, 2019

  • Inbound citations: 3
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

KHURAL NEWSPAPER AND ZEYNALOV v. AZERBAIJAN

Doc ref: 383/12 • ECHR ID: 001-198320

Document date: October 11, 2019

Cited paragraphs only

Communicated on 11 October 2019

FIFTH SECTION

Application no. 383/12 KHURAL NEWSPAPER and Avaz ZEYNALOV against Azerbaijan lodged on 13 December 2011

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The applicants are a newspaper and its chief editor. The application concerns civil defamation proceedings instituted against the applicants in connection with an article published in the applicant newspaper which criticised, among others, the executive director of the State Fund for Support of the Media (SFSM), following an event commemorating the 135th anniversary of the national media. On the occasion of that event, a number of journalists and newspapers had received awards and financial assistance from the State. The applicants were not among the recipients. Following the publication of the article, the executive director of the SFSM sued the applicants, claiming damages for defamation and public insult. The domestic courts upheld the claim, finding that the article contained baseless, defamatory and insulting expressions in respect of the claimant. The applicants were ordered to publish an apology and pay 5,000 Azerbaijani manats in damages.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Have the applicants exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the applicants invoke before the national authorities, at least in substance, the rights under Article 10 on which they now wish to rely before the Court and, more specifically, did they raise before the national authorities their grievances in respect of the part of their complaint concerning the alleged excessive amount of the award for damages?

2. Has there been an interference with the applicants ’ freedom of expression, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and n ecessary in terms of Article 10 § 2 in pursuit of a legitimate aim? Was the amount of compensation for damages awarded in the present case in compliance with the requirement of proportionality?

3. The parties are requested to submit a full translation into English or French of the impugned article.

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846