0 8000 12 11

On October 19, 2015, the General Jurisdiction Court of Lori Marz (Region), presided by Judge V. Hovnanyan, resumed examination of the case Avan Mental Health Center CJSC v. Zhuleta Amarikyan and HCA Vanadzor. The court hearing was attended by plaintiff’s representative Edgar Bademyan and defendant’s representative HCA Vanadzor lawyer Arayik Zalyan. Defendant Zh. Amarikyan and the representative of the third party who had not submitted any independent claim on the case, Azatutyun (Liberty) Radio Station did not attend the hearing. Considering that the latter were duly notified, the Court decided to resume the hearing in their absence.

At the court hearing, plaintiff’s representative lawyer E. Bademyan was the first to provide explanations. In his speech, he argued that the qualifications in the report and giving the floor to Zh. Amarikyan at the presentation were intended by the HCA Vanadzor against the Avan Mental Health Center. Nevertheless, he failed to provide any sound argument in support of the intent. The plaintiff’s representative also repeatedly exploited the fact that Zh. Amarikyan’s state was inadequate and her words could not be considered credible; at the same time, he referred to the positive opinion of the same Zh. Amarikyan about the Center which she allegedly used to express when treated at the Center. Interestingly, while the plaintiff party, represented by the Center’s Director A. Hakobyan, mentioned that Amarikyan had refused any treatment, later in their speech, they said that the woman had no allergy to medicines and was content with the services provided. The plaintiff party suggested that the HCA Vanadzor and advocate T. Hayrapetyan might have exerted pressure on Zh. Amarikyan and insisted on their claim for public apology and compensation of 3 million AMD.

At the same time, the plaintiff’s representative noted that with this claim they would like to set a precedence “to teach a lesson to non-governmental organizations as well”, in order for the latter to not criticize state institutions. He argued that the institution is known on international level as well and in this case such criticism affect the country’s reputation as well.

Overall, the speech of the plaintiff’s representative contained a series of contradictions and unfounded allegations.

Then the defendant’s representative A. Zalyan and presiding judge V. Hovnanyan asked questions trying to clarify the arguments and remarks cited in the plaintiff’s speech and particularly highlighted the question on how the plaintiff party brought a claim against a person who, allegedly was in an inadequate state and raised the issue of declaring Zh. Amarikyan incapable. In response, the plaintiff party stated that it was beyond the Center’s functions to bring a claim to declare someone incapable. As for the question on bringing the claim, the plaintiff party responded that the accepted procedure required them to do so.

Then defendant’s representative A. Zalyan, took the floor. He spoke about the role and purpose of NGOs and then referring to giving the floor to Zh. Amarikyan at the presentation, mentioned that she had merely exercised her constitutional right. The defendant party submitted an application on the claim limitation period to the effect that the plaintiff had filed the claim to the Court upon completion of the period under Article 1087.1 , RA Civil Code. According to the Article above, a person with honor, dignity or business reputation defamed through insult or slander may file a claim to a court of law to protect his/her right within 1 month upon having learnt about the insult or slander but no later than within 6 months from the moment of the insult or slander.

The representative of the plaintiff party attempted to clarify through questions the intention and purpose of the monitoring and touched upon the principles of drafting the presentation agenda.

The court hearing was adjourned due to the end of the business day.The next court hearing is scheduled for January 25, 2016, 11 am.

See also: hcav.am