CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 mars 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 3 March 2021 Published on 22 March 2021   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 36868/18 Alovsat Sayad oglu TALISHKHANLI and Others against Azerbaijan SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The present application, lodged by seven co-founders of a non ‑ governmental organisation, concern repeated refusals by the Ministry of Justice to register the organisation as a legal entity, alleged failure of the domestic courts to deliver reasoned decisions and alleged breach of the right to adversarial proceedings. The applicants complain under Article 11 of the Convention that by failing to register the non-governmental organisation co-founded by them the domestic authorities breached their right to freedom of association. They also complain under Article 6 of the Convention that their right to a reasoned decision was breached because in the course of ensuing proceedings the domestic courts failed to address their serious and pertinent arguments; furthermore, the principle of adversarial proceedings was breached because none of the domestic courts ensured the presence of the respondent party in the proceedings.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of their civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was the applicants’ right to a reasoned decision and the principle of adversarial proceedings respected (see, among others, Mazahir Jafarov v. Azerbaijan , no. 39331/09, 2 April 2020)? 2.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ freedom of association, in particular, their right to form an association, within the meaning of Article   11 §   1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article   11 § 2 (see Koretskyy and Others v.   Ukraine , no.   40269/02, 3 April 2008; The United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Others v.   Bulgaria (no. 2) , no. 34960/04, 18   October 2011; and Jafarov and Others v.   Azerbaijan , no.   27309/14, 25   July 2019)?