European Court of Human Rights
Council of Europe
Strasbourg


Dr. Horváth István
H-1012 Budapest
Várfok u. 14


MÁSODIK KAMARA

ECHR-R09R.HUN
AT/og

Kérelem száma: 35419/97
SZIVÁRVÁNY Társulás a Melegek Jogaiért
JUHÁSZ Géza és PÁLFI Balázs / Magyarország

Tisztelt Uram!

Mellékelem az Európai Emberi Jogi Bíróság (Második Kamarája) által a fenti számú ügyben hozott határozatot.

Ez a határozat jogerős és nem támadható sem a Bíróság, sem más testület előtt.

Ezen levél a Bíróság Eljárási Szabályzatának 56.§ (1) bekezdésén alapul.

Üdvözlettel:

Erik Fribergh
a Második Kamara titkára

Melléklet: Határozat



Postal address:
Council of Europe
F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex

Telephone: (0)3 88 412018

Internet: http://www.dhcour.coe.fr

Fax: (0)3 88 412791, (0)3 88 412730



////////////////////////



Council of Europe
European Court of Human Rights

Second Section

Decision
as to the admissibility of

Application no. 35419/97
by SZIVÁRVÁNY Társulás a Melegek Jogaiért,
Géza JUHÁSZ and Balázs PÁLFI
against Hungary

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of

    Mr  B. CONFORTI, President,
    Mrs V. STRÁZNICKÁ,
    Mr  E. LEVITS, judges,

and Mr E. FRIBERGH, Section Registar,

Delivered the following unanimous decision on 12 May 2000:

The Court has examined the applicants' complaints as they hava been submitted. it considers that the complaints about the non-registration of the applicant association fall to be examined primarily under Article 11 of the Convention which guarantees the right to freedom of association. The court observes that the restriction in question was prescribed bíróság law, i.e. Article 67 § 1 of the Constitution and section 2 § 2 of the Associations Act. The condition for registration that the applicant association should exlude minors from membership pursued the legitimate aims of the protection of morals and the rights and freedoms of others. The Court finds that the interference was proportionate to the aims pursued and could, therefore, reasonably be regarded as necessary in a democratic society. It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 and must be rejected, in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

As regards the remainder of the applicants' complaints, the Court finds that they do not disclose  any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols. It follows that this part of the application must likewise be rejected, in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

Accordingly, the Court

Declares the application inadmissible.

Erik FRIBERGH			Benedetto CONFORTI
Registar			President