CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 21 juin 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sEF21C475 { width:119.8%; border-collapse:collapse } .sDBBAE220 { width:9.38%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sD35D798C { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sB198A8A0 { width:32.8%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s11ADA21B { width:15.62%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s4214325C { width:13.54%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s73818145 { width:19.28%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sBF05AC7B { width:9.38%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s74DC3D21 { margin-left:33.01pt; padding-left:2.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold } .sBA6491B3 { width:32.8%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6C38EDA8 { width:15.62%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s85023616 { width:13.54%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s45FE4A2 { width:19.28%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s3192C8A1 { margin-left:36pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold }   Communicated on 21 June 2018   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 57978/14 Ramiz MAMMADOV and Others against Azerbaijan lodged on 15 August 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants are internally displaced persons (IDPs), who moved to Baku as a result of the occupation of their home towns by Armenian armed forces and settled in squatter houses built by them in Baku. The application concerns the alleged unlawful expropriation and demolition of the applicants’ squatter houses by the Baku Metropolitan for construction of an electricity depot and the alleged discriminatory treatment on the account of the applicants’ provision with free temporary accommodation due to their status as IDPs, whereas other residents, whose squatter houses had been demolished in the same area had been paid monetary compensation. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicants have “possessions” within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? If so, 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? In particular, what were the substantive and procedural conditions required by the applicable law for the expropriation or demolition 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)?   2.     Have the applicants suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention? In particular, have the applicants been refused to be paid monetary compensation, whereas other individuals in the same situation have been paid such compensation? If so, did that difference in treatment pursue a legitimate aim; and did it have a reasonable justification? APPENDIX     N o . Applicant name Birth year Nationality Place of residence Representative   Ramiz MAMMADOV 1953 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Fuad ABDULOV 1962 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Samad ABDULOV 1971 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Ibrahim ALIYEV 1949 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Fatma ALIYEVA 1956 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Bayram AZIZOV 1967 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Kifayat AZIZOVA 1966 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Khalig BAKHISHOV 1972 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Allahverdi DOLKHANOV 1952 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Giyas GULIYEV 1952 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Zaur GULIYEV 1980 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Rahila HADIYEVA 1947 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Anvar HASANOV 1958 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Elshad HUMBATOV 1963 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Kamil HUSEYNOV 1961 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Talish HUSEYNOV 1940 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Knyaz MAHMUDOV 1964 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Ahliyyat MAMMADOV 1955 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Elnur MAMMADOV 1971 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Shakir MURADOV 1964 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Emir NAMAZALIYEV 1942 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov   Vugar NAMAZALIYEV 1969 Azerbaijan Absheron Hafiz Hasanov