LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
Sorry, there was an error communicating with our API.
Try refreshing the page, and if the error persists, please try again in a few minutes.
HUSEYNOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN
Doc ref: 22698/20;22884/20;43743/20;35727/21;15254/22;29619/22 • ECHR ID: 001-225949
Document date: June 15, 2023
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
HUSEYNOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN
Doc ref: 22698/20;22884/20;43743/20;35727/21;15254/22;29619/22 • ECHR ID: 001-225949
Document date: June 15, 2023
Cited paragraphs only
FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 22698/20 Mashallah HUSEYNOV against Azerbaijan and 5 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 15 June 2023 as a Committee composed of:
Alena PoláÄková , President , Gilberto Felici, Raffaele Sabato , judges ,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants and their representatives is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention concerning the non ‑ enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions were communicated to the Azerbaijani Government (“the Governmentâ€).
THE LAW
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.
The Government acknowledged the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above ‑ mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The Government also undertook to ensure the enforcement of the domestic decisions under consideration in all the cases within the same three-month period, and to pay any costs of the domestic enforcement proceedings.
The payment and the enforcement of the domestic decisions will constitute the final resolution of the cases.
The applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declarations several weeks before the date of this decision. In reply, the applicants submitted that they were not satisfied with the terms of the unilateral declarations. In particular, they indicated that the amount of compensation provided for in the Government’s unilateral declarations was low.
The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:
“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applicationâ€.
Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI).
The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions (see, for example, Akhundov v. Azerbaijan, no. 39941/07, 3 February 2011, and Jafarli and Others v. Azerbaijan, no. 36079/06, 29 July 2010).
Noting the admissions and undertakings contained in the Government’s declarations as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 (c)).
In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).
Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (see Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 6 July 2023.
Viktoriya Maradudina Alena PoláÄková Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention
(non-enforcement of domestic decisions)
No.
Application no. Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Date of receipt of Government’s declaration
Date of receipt of applicant’s comments
Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage
per applicant
(in euros) [1]
Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application
(in euros) [2]
22698/20
21/05/2020
Mashallah
Harun oglu
HUSEYNOV
1960Ulviyya
MAHARRAMOVA
Baku
Gulusum
HASANOVA
Baku
16/02/2023
17/03/2023
3,600
250
22884/20
21/05/2020
Shukran
Harun oglu
HUSEYNOV
1970Ulviyya
MAHARRAMOVA
Baku
Gulusum
HASANOVA
Baku
16/02/2023
17/03/2023
3,600
250
43743/20
23/09/2020
Maharat
Oruj oglu
GAHRAMANOV
1960Mubariz
YOLCHIYEV
Baku
16/02/2023
24/03/2023
3,600
250
35727/21
29/06/2021
(3 applicants)
Yuksel
Rasim oglu
BABAYEV
1995Rukhsara
Rasim gizi
AGAYEVA
1990Ulviyya
Rasim gizi
BABAYEVA
1993Mubariz
YOLCHIYEV
Baku
16/02/2023
24/03/2023
3,000
250
15254/22
09/03/2022
Altay
Elkhan oglu
ALASGAROV
1984Javad
JAVADOV
Baku
16/02/2023
24/02/2023
600
250
29619/22
03/06/2022
Yengibar
Jamaladdin oglu
SAFAROV
1966Khalid
BAGIROV
Baku
16/02/2023
24/03/2023
3,600
250[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025
