CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 31 mars 2025

.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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 22 April 2025   SECOND SECTION Application no. 4137/21 Ruzhica NIKOLOVSKA against North Macedonia lodged on 13 January 2021 communicated on 31 March 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a fine in the amount of EUR 500 imposed by the domestic courts on the applicant, a lawyer, for contempt of court, concerning a comment she had allegedly made at a hearing. The applicant had allegedly stated: “Shall we not watch any more video recordings?”. The presiding judge of the trial bench found, and the three-judge panel of the court confirmed, that the applicant had addressed the court with irony, criticising the length of the hearing. The Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant’s constitutional complaint, finding that the applicant had not acted in a professional manner and that she had abused her rights and negatively affected the proceedings. The applicant complains under Article 10 of the Convention about a violation of her right to freedom of expression by the imposition of the fine on her for contempt of court.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression by the imposition of the fine on her for contempt of court, contrary to Article   10 of the Convention (see Morice v. France [GC], no.   29369/10, §§   124-39, 23 April 2015; Bono v. France , no. 29024/11, §§   43 et seq., 15   December 2015; and Rodriguez Ravelo v.   Spain , no.   48074/10, §§ 39-51, 12 January 2016)?