Communicated on 18 May 2017

FIFTH SECTION

Application no. 885/12 Rafig SAFAROV against Azerbaijan lodged on 22 December 2011

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Rafig Safarov , is an Azerbaijani national who was born in 1959 and lives in Baku.

The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant is author of the book entitled “Change of the ethnic composition of the people of Irevan Governorate in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries”.

On an unspecified date in 2010 a youth NGO “ Irali ” published the electronic version of the book on the website of one of their projects www.history.az .

On an unspecified date in 2010 the applicant became aware of the publication of his book on the above-mentioned website. The information on the website stated that the book had been downloaded 417 times.

On an unspecified date in 2010 the “ Irali ” removed the book from the website upon the applicant ’ s demand.

On 3 August 2010 the applicant brought a civil claim before the Sabail District Court against the “ Irali ” asking for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage caused to him as a result of the unauthorised reproduction of his book.

On 13 October 2010 the Sabail District Court dismissed the applicant ’ s claims referring to the introductory paragraph of Article 18 of the Copyright Law which allowed reproduction of the copyrighted materials for certain purposes. The court further held that the book had been removed from the website upon the applicant ’ s demand and that the applicant failed to prove that he had suffered pecuniary or non-pecuniary damage.

On 22 November 2010 the applicant lodged an appeal with the Baku Court of Appeal against the judgment of the first-instance court arguing that the court had failed to refer to any of the purposes listed exhaustively in the following paragraphs of Article 18 of the Copyright Law.

On 24 January 2011 the Baku Court of Appeal upheld the first-instance court ’ s judgment reiterating its reasoning.

On 14 June 2011 the Supreme Court upheld the Baku Court of Appeal ’ s judgment reiterating the lower courts ’ reasoning and in addition referring also to Article 15 § 3 of the Copyright Law, which stated that once the lawfully published copies of a book are sold, those copies could be further distributed without the author ’ s consent and without paying royalty to the author.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of a failure by the State to protect his intellectual property interests in relation to infringement of his copyright on account of the unlawful reproduction of his book.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the domestic courts examine the arguments put forward by him and were the judgments of the domestic courts properly reasoned?

2. Has there been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 with regard to the alleged failure of the State to protect the applicant ’ s intellectual property interests in relation to infringement of his copyright on account of unauthorised reproduction of his book?