MAGYAR KÉTFARKÚ KUTYA PÁRT v. HUNGARY JUDGMENT 41 (c) Conclusion 117. In the light of the foregoing, the Court is not satisfied that the Hungarian law applicable in the present case, on the basis of which the MKKP’s freedom to impart information and ideas was restricted, was formulated with sufficient precision, for the purposes of paragraph 2 of Article 10 of the Convention, so as to rule out any arbitrariness and enable the MKKP to regulate its conduct accordingly. 118. There has therefore been a violation of Article 10 of the Convention. In the light of this finding, it is not necessary to examine separately the MKKP’s remaining arguments under Article 10 of the Convention. III. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 119. Article 41 of the Convention provides: “If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.” A. Damage 120. The MKKP claimed 100,000 Hungarian forints (HUF approximately 330 euros (EUR)) in respect of pecuniary damage. This sum corresponded to the amount which it was ordered by the Kúria to pay as a fine. 121. The Government did not contest this claim. 122. The Court reiterates that Article 41 empowers it to afford the injured party such satisfaction as appears to it to be appropriate (see O’Keeffe v. Ireland [GC], no. 35810/09, § 199, ECHR 2014 (extracts)). 123. The Court finds that the MKKP suffered pecuniary loss as a result of the fine that it was ordered to pay (see paragraph 27 above). Having regard to the link between the fine imposed in the domestic proceedings and the violation of Article 10 found by the Court, the MKKP is entitled to recover the full amount claimed. B. Costs and expenses 124. The MKKP claimed EUR 3,000 for the costs and expenses incurred in the proceedings before the Chamber and EUR 3,750 for those incurred before the Grand Chamber. These amounts correspond to twenty hours of legal work in respect of the proceedings before the Chamber, charged by its lawyer at an hourly rate of EUR 150, and twenty-five hours of legal work in respect of the proceedings before the Grand Chamber, charged at the same