FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Applications nos. 64680/14 and 64695/15 Diana Hristova BECHEVA against Bulgaria Kostadinka Hristova KOSEVA

and others against Bulgaria

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 7 October 2021 as a Committee composed of:

Armen Harutyunyan, President, Jolien Schukking, Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.

The applicants were represented by Ms S. Vasileva, a lawyer practising in Sofia.

The applicants’ complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning the excessive duration of restitution proceedings were communicated to the Bulgarian Government (“the Government”).

THE LAW

Having regard to the identical subject matter of the applications, which concern the same domestic proceedings, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.

The Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by the applications. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention

The declaration, submitted on 12 May 2021, provided as follows:

“By means of the present declaration, the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria acknowledge a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human rights in the above-mentioned case. The violation stems from the excessive length of the restitution procedure initiated by the applicants.

In view of the violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention, the Government offer to pay jointly to Diana Hristova Becheva, Kostadinka Hristova Koseva, Daniela Boyanova Ivanova, Silvia Boyanova Radeva and Kiril Hristov Gerdzhikov EUR 3,300 (three thousand and three hundred euros) to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants. Such payment shall not prejudice the applicants’ entitlement under domestic law to seek restitution or compensation in lieu of restitution.

The sum above will be converted into Bulgarian levs and the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court to strike the case out of its lists of cases. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”

The applicants were sent the Government’s unilateral declaration on 31 May 2021. The Court has not received any response from them.

The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:

“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.

Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI).

The Court has clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the length of restitution proceedings in Bulgaria (see, among others, Lyubomir Popov v. Bulgaria , no. 69855/01, 7 January 2010; Popov and Chonin v. Bulgaria , no. 36094/08, 17 February 2015; Zikatanova and Others v. Bulgaria , no. 45806/11, 12 December 2019).

Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declaration as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 (c)).

In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (see Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declaration and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.

Done in English and notified in writing on 28 October 2021.

{signature_p_2}

Andrea Tamietti Armen Harutyunyan Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention

(excessive duration of restitution proceedings)

No.

Application no. Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses

jointly to the applicants [1]

(in euros)

64680/14

10/09/2014

Diana Hristova BECHEVA

1936

3,300

64695/14

19/09/2014

(4 applicants)

Kostadinka Hristova KOSEVA

1931Daniela Boyanova IVANOVA

1954Silvia Boyanova RADEVA

1957Kiril Hristov GERDZHIKOV

1932[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.