Your trusted source

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has issued two judgements in two cases against Armenia – Ghulyan v. Armenia and Scholz AG v. Armenia, ordering Armenia to pay a total of €7,200.

The case of Ghulyan v. Armenia relates to a dismissal of an employee. The applicant, Voskehat Ghulyan, lodge an application against Armenia with the ECHR on 28 May 2013, insisting on an unlawful dismissal under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Ghulyan worked in the British Council’s Armenia office as a project manager on a full-time, permanent contract starting from 25 November 2002. In the course of her employment the applicant had two children, born on 27 March 2008 and 7 May 2010. The applicant spent her maternity leave in the United States and regularly sent requests to extend that leave every six months for the duration of her absence. In particular, she sent such requests in March and September 2009 as regards her first child and then in April and September 2010 as regards her second child. It appears that her maternity leave was extended, based on those requests. In March 2011 her leave was further extended until 1 September 2011.

According to the applicant, on 19 August 2011 she requested another extension of her maternity leave. On 30 August Ghulyan received notice of termination of her employment contract prior to its term. The notice referred to the change in volume and conditions of work at the British Council, as well as the need to reduce the number of staff.

An Armenian court found that the British Council didn’t breach the law by firing Ghulyan. The Court of Appeals unpled this ruling, while the Court of Cassation declared the applicant’s appeal on points of law inadmissible for lack of merit.

The applicant claimed 62,700 euros in respect of pecuniary damage and 19,000 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage, The European Court, however, didn’t discern any causal link between the violation found and the pecuniary damage alleged, rejecting this claim. On the other hand, the court found a violation of Article 6 of the Convention – right to a fair trial (Article 6.1, impartiality of the court) and awarded the applicant €3,600 in respect of non‑pecuniary damage. Armenia has been ordered to pay the sum to Ghulyan within three months.

In the second case of Scholz AG v. Armenia, the ECHR again found a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention.

The applicant which has a registered office in Essingen, Germany, filed the appeal with the European Court on March 19, 2010 under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

From the 1990s onwards the applicant company regularly purchased scrap metal from A. Safaryan and Associates LLC, a limited liability company registered in Armenia. On 8 February 1999, 10 April 2000 and 2 April 2003 Scholz AG and KBKS (another German company owned by the applicant company) concluded three contracts with the respondent, under which KBKS and the applicant company were to make advance payments to the respondent in return for scrap metal.

On 8 April 2002 KBKS and the applicant company concluded an assignment agreement whereby KBKS transferred all its contractual rights, including those towards the LLC, to the applicant company. On 8 November 2002 the applicant company provided the LLC with a loan in the amount of 100,000 euros, which was due to be repaid by 31 January 2003. The purpose of the loan was to assist Associates LLC in paying off a bank loan, but it was not apparently paid back to the applicant company.

It further appeared that the respondent failed to meet its contractual obligations vis-à-vis the applicant company, in that it supplied less scrap metal than the advance payments that it had already received.

The Germany company insisted on a violation of a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention after the local courts didn’t accept the company’s claim on grounds that under the contract the Arbitration Tribunal was set to deal with any issues if they emerged.

In the case filed with the ECHR, Scholz AG claimed 1,213,824dollars and 116,000 euros plus interest in respect of pecuniary damage, and 100,000 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

The European Court held that there had been a violation of Article 6 and obliged Armenia to pay the German company €3,600 within three months, dismissing the remainder of the applicant’s claims.