265_15 substantive_scope 15. The Court has no reason to doubt that the applicant shared the views that his co-workers conveyed or had intended to convey by way of their expressive conduct in holding solo demonstrations. However, the Court 4 ZAKHARKIN v. RUSSIA JUDGMENT notes that in the context of the present case the main thrust of the applicant’s primary grievances concerns and arose from the allegedly arbitrary application of the domestic legislation relating to group events and the liability of organisers of such events for breaches of the PEA, namely its requirement of prior notification. The Court thus finds it appropriate to examine this case under Article 11 of the Convention, taking into account the general principles it has established in the context of Article 10 (compare Novikova and Others, cited above, §§ 91 and 162).