CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 février 2020

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 24 February 2020 Published on 16 March 2020   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 24697/14 G I SERVICE OOD against Bulgaria lodged on 21 March 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant company was registered in 2006 and has its seat in Gotse Delchev. The application concerns administrative-penal proceedings. The applicant company complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the national courts examining the case – the Gotse Delchev District Court and the Blagoevgrad Administrative Court – failed to respond to an argument it raised. It had been fined by the Blagoevgrad Labour Inspectorate for not having made written employment contracts with two of its employees, and argued that the administrative decisions imposing the penalties had been based on a provision of the Labour Code defining a different administrative offence. It relied on case law of the domestic courts in which administrative penalties had been quashed in similar circumstances. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Did the Gotse Delchev District Court and the Blagoevgrad Administrative Court give reasoned judgments, as required under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Ruiz Torija v.   Spain , 9 December 1994, Series A no. 303 ‑ A, and Ivan Stoyanov Vasilev v. Bulgaria , no. 7963/05, §§   33-5, 4   June 2013)? In particular, did they respond to the applicant company’s argument that the Blagoevgrad Labour Inspectorate’s decisions imposing on it administrative penalties had been based on a provision of the Labour Code, namely its Article 63 § 2, which defined a different administrative offence?