CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 septembre 2013

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }       FOURTH SECTION Application no. 6987/07 Lyubov Viktorovna GUSEVA against Bulgaria lodged on 18 January 2007     The facts and complaints in this case have been summarised in the Court’s Statement of Facts and Questions to the Parties, which is available in HUDOC.   ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS     1.     Has there been an interference with the applicant’s freedom of expression, in particular her right to receive and impart information, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law, did it pursue a legitimate aim and was it necessary, in terms of Article 10 § 2?     2.     If the above question is answered in the negative, has there been an interference with the applicant’s freedom of association with others within the meaning of Article 11 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law, did it pursue a legitimate aim and was it necessary in terms of Article   11 § 2?