FOURTH SECTION

PARTIAL DECISION

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application no. 50941/99 by Julijana UGLEŠIĆ against Croatia

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section) , sitting on 7 September 2000 as a Chamber composed of

Mr G. Ress, President ,

Mr A. Pastor Ridruejo,

Mr L. Caflisch,

Mr J. Makarczyk,

Mr I. Cabral Barreto,

Mrs N. Vajić,

Mr M. Pellonpää , judges , [Note1]

and Mr V. Berger, Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application introduced on 21 March 1999 and registered on 16 September 1999,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is a Croatian citizen, born in 1943 and residing in Zagreb , Croatia.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

On 22 March 1995 the applicant instituted civil proceedings with the Zagreb Municipal Court seeking damages concerning the damage caused to her flat due to repairs made to her neighbour’s flat. The Court has not yet reached any decision.

The applicant further alleges that on 16 August 1997 she was the victim on an attempted murder by one T. R-M. She was shot and treated for her injury at the Å ibenik General Hospital. The applicant has not, however, neither laid an information with the State Attorney’s Office alleging that T. R-M. had attempted to murder her nor instituted any civil proceedings for damages against the perpetrator. Instead, she contacted the Croatian Helsinki Committee in Zagreb and wrote some letters to several Croatian Ministries.

COMPLAINTS

1. Complaints concerning the civil proceedings related to the applicant’s flat in Zagreb

a) The applicant complains in respect of the civil proceedings that she instituted with the Zagreb Municipal Court under Article 14 of the Convention and Article 4 of Protocol No. 3.

b) She further complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 that the proceedings related to her request for damages have been unfair and that her right to property was violated.

c) The applicant also complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the length of those proceedings has been excessive and under Article 13 of the Convention that she had no effective remedy in respect of those proceedings.

2. Complaints in regard to the attempted murder of the applicant

She also complains under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention insofar as the domestic authorities failed to protect her rights in respect of the attempted murder.

THE LAW [Note2]

1 . Complaints concerning the civil proceedings before the Zagreb Municipal Court

a) The applicant complains that her rights under Article 14 of the Convention and Article 3 of Protocol No. 4 were violated. The Court notes that the applicant failed to substantiate those claims in any respect.

It follows that those claims are manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention and must be rejected pursuant to Article 35 § 4.

b) The applicant complains that the civil proceedings considering her request for damages have been unfair, and she invokes Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, as well as that her right to property under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 was violated.

The Court notes that the applicant’s case is still pending before the court of first instance and, therefore, her claims as to the fairness of the proceedings and the violation of her right to property are premature.

It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention and, therefore, must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4.

c) The applicant further complains under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention that the length of the civil proceedings considering her request for damages, that were instituted on 22 March 1995 and are still pending before the court of first instance, has been excessive and that she has no remedy for speeding up those proceedings.

The Court considers that it cannot, on the basis of the case file, determine the admissibility of those complaints and that it is therefore necessary, in accordance with Rule 54 § 3 (b) [Note3] of the Rules of Court, to give notice of this part of the application to the respondent Government.

2. The applicant also complains under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention that the state organs failed to protect her rights in connection with the murder attempted against her.

The Court notes that the applicant failed to lay an information with the State Attorney’s Office alleging that T. R-M. had attempted to murder her or to institute civil proceedings for damages against the perpetrator. Instead, she contacted the Croatian Helsinki Committee and wrote several letters to some of the Croatian Ministries.

It follows that this part of the application is out of the Court’s competence ratione temporis . The complaints lodged by the applicant with the Croatian Helsinki Committee and her letters to different Croatian Ministries after the date of the entry into force of the Convention in respect of Croatia (i.e. 5 November 1997) cannot be taken into account as they are not remedies within the meaning of Article 35 § 1 of the Convention. Therefore, this part of the application must be declared inadmissible pursuant to Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

DECIDES TO ADJOURN the examination of the applicant ’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention about the length of proceedings regarding her request for damages and that she had no effective remedy in respect of those proceedings;

DECLARES INADMISSIBLE the remainder of the application.

Vincent Berger Georg RESS Registrar              President

[Note1] Judges names are to be followed by a COMMA and a MANUAL LINE BREAK ( Shift+Enter ). When inserting names via AltS please remove the substitute judge’s name, if necessary, and the extra paragraph return(s). (There is to be no extra space between the judges’ names and that of the Section Registrar.)

[Note2] In your reasoning specify: Complaint / Article of the Convention [/ Succinct summary of Government’s submissions / Succinct summary of applicant’s submissions in communicated case] / Court’s [Commission’s] case-law, if any / Application of case-law to facts of particular case or considerations for specific facts of case.

Remember to use automatic paragraph numbering ( Alt+N ) followed by a tab.

[Note3] Change as necessary.