lagen.nu
no. 13490/25

Abbasov and Ahmadov v. Azerbaijan

Struck out of the list

Domstol
European Court of Human Rights
Avgörandedatum
2026-07-02
ECLI
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2026:0702DEC001349025
Artiklar
6, 37, 37-1
Källa
hudoc.echr.coe.int

Berörda konventionsartiklar

THIRD SECTION

Applications nos. 13490/25 and 13674/25 Natig ABBASOV against Azerbaijan and

Mukhtar AHMADOV against Azerbaijan (see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 2 July 2026 as a Committee composed of:

Úna Ní Raifeartaigh , President , Canòlic Mingorance Cairat, Vasilka Sancin , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications against the Republic of Azerbaijan lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table,

Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

The list of applicants and their representatives are set out in the appended table.

The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning the unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings were communicated to the Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”). The applicant’s complaints in application no. 13674/25 based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.

Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.

After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.

The Government acknowledged the violation of applicants’ rights. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases.

The applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declarations several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from the applicants accepting the terms of the declarations.

The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:

“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.

Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI).

The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings (see, for example, Gafgaz Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 60259/11, 15 October 2015, Huseynli and Others v. Azerbaijan, nos. 67360/11 and 2 others, 11 February 2016; Hasanov and Majidli v. Azerbaijan, nos. 9626/14 and 9717/14, 7 October 2021; and Hasanov v. Azerbaijan [Committee], no. 59202/12, 28 April 2022).

Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declarations as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 (c)). In the absence of arguments from the applicants to the contrary, the Court has no reasons to consider that the compensation offered by the Government constitutes inadequate or otherwise unreasonable redress for the violation of their Convention rights (see Ryabkin and Volokitin v. Russia (dec.), nos. 52166/08 and 8526/09, §§ 49-50, 28 June 2016, and Igranov and Others v. Russia , nos. 42399/13 and 8 others, § 24, 20 March 2018, and, for a similar approach, Antovski and Others v. North Macedonia (dec.) [Committee], no. 68160/17, 8 December 2022).

In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (see Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.

Done in English and notified in writing on 27 August 2026.

Viktoriya Maradudina Úna Ní Raifeartaigh Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 of the Convention

(unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings)

No.

Application no. Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Date of receipt of Government’s declaration

Date of receipt of applicant’s comments, if any

Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per applicant

(in euros) [1]

Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application

(in euros) [2]

13490/25

17/04/2025

Natig

Firudin oglu ABBASOV

1979

Aliyev Ruslan

Baku

19/02/2026

-

900

225

13674/25

18/04/2025

Mukhtar Elman oglu AHMADOV

1985

Sadigova Zibeyda

Baku

19/02/2026

23/03/2026

1,800

225

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.