41 “The Court's supervisory functions oblige it to pay the utmost attention to the principles characterizing a "democratic society". … This means, amongst other things, that every "formality", "condition", "restriction" or "penalty" imposed …must be proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.” This approach was restated in Gillow v United Kingdom Application No 9063/80 Judgment of 24 November 1986 Series A no. 109 at paragraph 55: “As to the principles relevant to the assessment of the "necessity" of a given measure "in a democratic society", reference should be made to the Court's case-law. The notion of necessity implies a pressing social need; in particular, the measure employed must be proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. In addition, the scope of the margin of appreciation enjoyed by the national authorities will depend not only on the nature of the aim of the restriction but also on the nature of the right involved.” 106.3 Concerning the social need, the European Court does not only verify if the State applied the principle of margin of appreciation in good faith, it also assesses whether the reasons given are“relevant and sufficient”, as the Court specified in Olsson vs. Sweden Application no.10465/83 Judgment of 24 March 1988 Series A no. 130 at paragraph 68. 106.4 Next, in accordance with the specification set out in Sporrong and Lonnroth vs. Sweden Applications no 7151/75, 7152/75 Judgment