CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 7 juin 2024

.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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 24 June 2024   FIRST SECTION Application no. 50190/18 Nigar Shahvalad gizi KOCHERLI against Azerbaijan lodged on 8 October 2018 communicated on 7 June 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s civil claim for defamation against the Ministry of Internal Affairs; M.M., the head of the Nasimi District Police Department; and O.A., the head of a division in the press service of the Ministry. The applicant, owner of a bookstore chain in Azerbaijan, complained before the domestic courts that she had been insulted by M.M. in his office, due to her complaints addressed to various authorities and the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan about inactivity of the police investigating the theft committed in the main office of the chain. She also complained that, after she had shared information on her Facebook page describing what had happened in M.M.’s office, O.A. made a statement on an Internet news portal (qafqazinfo.az), where he too insulted the applicant using offensive language and declared that her allegations were untrue, damaging her honour and dignity. The applicant asked for a retraction and an apology to be issued on the same news portal and for an award of non ‑ pecuniary damage. By a final judgment of 6 February 2018 (served on the applicant on 9 April 2018) the Supreme Court dismissed her claims. Relying on Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention the applicant complains about a violation of her Convention rights. In particular, she complains that the domestic courts failed to protect her right to her reputation.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of her civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention?   2.     Is Article 8 of the Convention applicable in the present case? In particular, did the alleged injury to the applicant’s reputation attain a sufficient level of seriousness and in a manner causing prejudice to her personal enjoyment of the right to respect for private life for this provision to come into play ( Axel Springer AG   v.   Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 83, 7   February 2012)? If so, has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her private life, within the meaning of Article   8 §   1 of the Convention? In the affirmative, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article   8 §   2?   The parties are requested to provide an English translation of the relevant statement made by O.A. on the Internet news portal. They are also requested to provide copies of the applicant’s written requests lodged before the domestic courts and the minutes of all court hearings.