CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 28 septembre 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s4954B46 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:28.35pt; text-align:justify } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } Published on 18 October 2021   FIRST SECTION Application no. 13086/20 N.O. against Greece lodged on 11 March 2020 communicated on 4 January 2021 and 28 September 2021   The Subject matter of the case and Questions to the parties is available in HUDOC. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES 1.     In respect of application no. 13086/20, having regard to the measures taken in response to the Court’s decisions to indicate interim measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, was there a hindrance by the State with the effective exercise of the applicant’s right of application, ensured by Article 34 of the Convention (see Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos.   46827/99 and 46951/99, §§   128-129, ECHR 2005 ‑ I)?   Was there an objective impediment which prevented compliance with the Court’s interim measures? If so, did the Government take all reasonable steps to remove the impediment and to keep the Court informed of the situation (see Paladi v.   Moldova [GC], no.   39806/05, § 92, 10   July 2009, and Rrapo v.   Albania , no.   58555/10, § 75-88, 25 September 2012)?