CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 février 2023

.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 } .s9252AC04 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .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 } Published on 6 March 2023   THIRD SECTION Application no. 11130/18 UNION OF ATHEISTS against Greece lodged on 26 February 2018 communicated on 27 January 2021 and 13 February 2023   The facts and complaints in this application have been summarised in the Court’s Statement of facts and Questions to the Parties, which is available in HUDOC. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant association have at its disposal an effective remedy, as required by Article 13 of the Convention, for its complaints under Articles 9 and 14 of the Convention, having regard to the fact that the decision on its application for annulment was issued after the end of school year 2017-2018 and that the Supreme Administrative Court did not examine it on the merits for reasons not pertaining to the applicant association?