CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 avril 2019

.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 }   Communicated on 30 April 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 7281/13 Faruk AVCI against Turkey lodged on 12 December 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns civil proceedings brought by the applicant before the Ankara Labour Court. The applicant complains under Article   6   §   1 of the Convention that the principles of adversarial proceedings and equality of arms were not respected in his case owing to the fact that neither the first-instance court’s reasoned decision nor the opposing party’s appeal against it were communicated to him. He argues that he lost his right to participate effectively in the appeal proceedings as a result of those procedural shortcomings. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES 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, were the principles of equality of arms and adversarial proceedings respected as regards the examination of the case by the Court of Cassation without the applicant’s participation (see, among others, Özgür Keskin v. Turkey , no. 12305/09, 17 October 2017; Dilipak and Karakaya v.   Turkey , nos. 7942/05 and 24838/05, § 77, 4 March 2014; and, Zavodnik v.   Slovenia , no. 53723/13, § 70, 21 May 2015)?