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

KHALILOV AND TAGIYEVA v. AZERBAIJAN

Doc ref: 73460/17 • ECHR ID: 001-182689

Document date: April 4, 2018

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 1

KHALILOV AND TAGIYEVA v. AZERBAIJAN

Doc ref: 73460/17 • ECHR ID: 001-182689

Document date: April 4, 2018

Cited paragraphs only

Communicated on 4 April 2018

FIFTH SECTION

Application no. 73460/17 Mursal KHALILOV and Minavar TAGIYEVA against Azerbaijan lodged on 4 October 2017

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns demolition of a house, partly owned by the applicants, by the Housing and Communal Services Department of the Office of the Head of the Baku City Executive Authority for construction of a road. Initially no compensation was paid to the applicants. The domestic courts ordered payment of compensation in the amount of 1,500 Azerbaijani manats per sq. m. of their possessions.

QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES

1. Have the applicants been deprived of their possessions in the public interest, and in accordance with the conditions provided for by law, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (see Akhverdiyev v. Azerbaijan , no. 76254/11 , 29 January 2015; Khalikova v. Azerbaijan , no. 42883/11 , 22 October 2015; and Maharramov v. Azerbaijan , no. 5046/07, 30 March 2017)?

In particular, what were the substantive and procedural conditions required by the applicable law for the expropriation to be lawful, and were those conditions complied with in the present case? If the interference was lawful, did that interference impose an excessive individual burden on the applicants (see, mutatis mutandis, Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy, [GC], no. 22774/93, § 59, ECHR 1999-V)? Were the amounts of compensation paid to the applicants fair and adequate in terms of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1?

2. Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of their civil rights and obligations in the proceedings concerning the alleged violation of their property rights, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was the applicants ’ right to a reasoned judgment respected?

3. Has there been an interference with the applicants ’ right to respect for their home, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention, on account of the demolition of the house by the State authorities? If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2?

APPENDIX

N o .

Applicant

Birth year

Place of residence

Nationality

Representative

Mursal KHALILOV

1957Baku

Azerbaijani

Aydin Khalilov

Minavar TAGIYEVA

1934Baku

Azerbaijani

Aydin Khalilov

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 400211 • Paragraphs parsed: 44892118 • Citations processed 3448707