003-6400971-8401939

issued by the Registrar of the Court   ECHR 172 (2019)   09.05.2019   Judgments and decisions of 9 May 2019   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing six judgments1 and 55 decisions2:   one Chamber judgment is summarised below;   five Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been submitted to the Court, and   the 55 decisions, can be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.   The judgment below is available only in English.   Just Satisfaction   Maharramov v. Azerbaijan (application no. 5046/07)   The case concerned the question of just satisfaction with regard to Mr Maharramov’s complaint that   he had been unlawfully and unjustifiably deprived of his property without any compensation.   Mr Maharramov owned a shop, which the local authority destroyed so that the street could be   widened, although he had refused to vacate it.   In its principal judgment of 30 March 2017 the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 1   of Protocol No.1 (protection of property) to the European Convention on Human Rights.   The Court also decided that the question of just satisfaction was not ready for decision and reserved   it for examination at a later date.   Just satisfaction: In its judgment today, the Court held that Azerbaijan was to pay Mr Maharramov   50,000 euros (EUR) in respect of pecuniary damage, EUR 3,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage,   and EUR 1,900 in respect of costs and expenses.   This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,   judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. To receive   the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here: www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter   @ECHR_Press.   Press contacts   [email protected] | tel: +33 3 90 21 42 08   Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)   Denis Lambert (tel: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)   Inci Ertekin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 55 30)   Patrick Lannin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 44 18)   Somi Nikol (tel: + 33 3 90 21 64 25)   Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber   judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a   panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and   deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the   Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.   Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.   Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution   Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member   States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.   2