CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 novembre 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 } .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 } Published on 27 November 2023   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 35359/23 Nikolozi GOGINASHVILI against Georgia lodged on 15 September 2023 communicated on 6 November 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the alleged lack of impartiality of Judge V.K. sitting on a three-judge panel of the Supreme Court, which ruled against the applicant in a civil case he had brought against an electricity distribution company in Tbilisi. The applicant claims that Judge V.K. lacked impartiality on account of the fact that he had previously taken a decision on the same facts in another set of proceedings in his capacity as a first instance judge. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES In the light of the applicant’s allegations concerning the lack of impartiality of Judge V.K., was the Supreme Court, which dealt with the applicant’s civil case, impartial, as required by Article   6 §   1 of the Convention (see Micallef v. Malta [GC], no. 17056/06, §§ 93-99, ECHR   2009; Pasquini v. San Marino , no. 50956/16, §§ 139-53, 2 May 2019; and Stoimenovikj and Miloshevikj v. North Macedonia , and no. 59842/14, §§   34 ‑ 43, 25 March 2021)?