LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
Sorry, there was an error communicating with our API.
Try refreshing the page, and if the error persists, please try again in a few minutes.
MILETIĆ AND OTHERS v. SERBIA
Doc ref: 48547/12, 50004/12, 52159/12, 52170/12, 60883/12, 60888/12, 61586/12, 61853/12, 63199/12, 63418/12, ... • ECHR ID: 001-150518
Document date: December 16, 2014
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 3
MILETIĆ AND OTHERS v. SERBIA
Doc ref: 48547/12, 50004/12, 52159/12, 52170/12, 60883/12, 60888/12, 61586/12, 61853/12, 63199/12, 63418/12, ... • ECHR ID: 001-150518
Document date: December 16, 2014
Cited paragraphs only
THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no . 48547/12 Stanimirka MILETIĆ against Serbia and 19 other applications (see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting on 16 December 2014 as a Committee composed of:
Ján Šikuta , President, Dragoljub Popović , Iulia Antoanella Motoc , judges,
and Marialena Tsirli , Deputy Section Registrar ,
Having regard to the above applications lodged between 23 July 2012 and 1 November 2012 ,
Having regard to the declaration s submitted by the respondent Government on 10 October 2013 requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. They were all represented by Mr. I. Kali ć, a lawyer practicing in Novi Pazar.
The Serbian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent M s V . Rod ić.
The applicants are former employees of Raška Holding u restruktuiranju (the debtor) , a socially-owned company. They obtained final court decision s ordering the debtor to pay them certain sums.
Relying on Article s 6 and 13 of the Convention, as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention the applicants complain ed about the failure by the national authorities to enforce those decision s .
The applications had been communicated to the Government .
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their similar factual and legal background.
After the failure of attempts to reach a friendly settlement, by a letter of 10 October 2010 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declaration s with a view to resolving the issue raised by the applications. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.
The declaration in respect of each application provided as follows:
“ the Government of the Republic of Serbia is ready to accept that there had been a violation of the applicant ’ s right under Article 6 paragraph 1 and Article 13 of the Convention, as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and offer to pay to the applicant, [the applicant ’ s name] , the amount of EUR 1,800 [one thousand eight hundred euro]...
This sum, which cover s any and all non-pecuniary damage as well as any and all costs, shall be paid in dinar counter-value, free of any taxes that may be applicable and to an account named by the applicant . The sum shall be payable within three months from the date of delivery of the decision of the Court .
.. further ... the Government offer to pay to the applicant, from their own funds, the sums awarded in the domestic decision (s) under consideration in this case, less any amounts which may have already been paid on the basis of the said decision (s) , plus the costs of the domestic enforcement proceedings.
These payments will constitute the final resolution of the case.
The Government regret the occurrence of the actions which have led to the bringing of the present application. ”
The applicants did not respond to the Government ’ s unilateral declarations.
The Court recalls that Article 37 of the Convention provides that it may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to one of the conclusions specified, under (a), (b) or (c) of paragraph 1 of that Article. Article 37 § 1 (c) enables the Court in particular 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 applications”.
It also recalls that in certain circumstances, it may strike out an 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.
To this end, the Court will examine carefully the Government ’ s declaration s in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment ( Tahsin Acar v. Turkey , [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI ; WAZA Spółka z. o.o. v. Poland (dec.) no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; and Sulwińska v. Poland (dec.) no. 28953/03).
The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Serbia, its practice concerning complaints about the non ‑ enforcement of final domestic decision rendered against socially/State ‑ owned companies (see, for example, R. Kačapor and Others v. Serbia , nos. 2269/06, 3041/06, 3042/06, 3043/06, 3045/06 and 3046/06, 15 January 2008; CrniÅ¡anin and Others v. Serbia , nos. 35835/05, 43548/05, 43569/05 and 36986/06, 13 January 2009 ; RaÅ¡ković and Milunović v. Serbia , nos. 1789/07 and 28058/07, 31 May 2011; Milunović and ÄŒekrlić v. Serbia (dec.), nos. 3716/09 and 38051/09, 17 May 2011; and StoÅ¡ić v. Serbia , no. 64931/1, 1 October 2013).
Having regard to the nature of the admissions contained in the Government ’ s declaration s , as well as the amount of compensation proposed, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 (c)).
Moreover, in light of the above considerations, and in particular given the clear and extensive case-law on the topic, 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 application s (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).
Further, the Court interprets the Government ’ s declaration s as meaning that in the event of failure to settle within the thre e-month period indicated in those declaration s , simple interest shall be payable on the amount in question at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points.
Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration s , the application s could be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention ( Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case s 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 s under Article s 6 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and of the modalities 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.
Marialena Tsirli Ján Å ikuta Deputy Registrar President
Appe ndix
No .
Application No .
Lodged on
Applicant
Date of birth
Place of residence
Represented by
48547/12
23/07/2012
Stanimirka MILETIĆ
01/10/1949
Selo Postenje
Ismet KALIĆ
50004/12
30/07/2012
Sanija LAKOTA
19/09/1962
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
52159/12
04/08/2012
Mirsad BRUNČEVIĆ
05/06/1961
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
52170/12
06/08/2012
Sadija LOŠOVIĆ
23/04/1957
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
60883/12
12/09/2012
Milaheta BISLIM
01/07/1962
Novi Paza
Ismet KALIĆ
60888/12
12/09/2012
Mileva ĐULČIĆ
01/06/1958
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
61586/12
21/09/2012
Ševćeta LOTINAC
28/04/1954
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
61853/12
22/09/2012
Vesna ILIĆ
16/03/1975
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
63199/12
10/09/2012
Mihrija DAGLAR
20/05/1966
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
63418/12
27/09/2012
Milovan VESELINOVIĆ
08/11/1961
Novi Pazar
Jelena VESELINOVIĆ
04/11/1989
Novi Pazar
Zagorka VESELINOVIĆ
02/02/1991
Novi Pazar
Tatjana VESELINOVIĆ
09/12/1998
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
64865/12
29/09/2012
Deniza ARAPOVIĆ
09/07/1954
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
65645/12
03/10/2012
Ajša BAĆIĆANIN
28/03/1960
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
65835/12
04/10/2012
Remzija SINANČEVIĆ
30/04/1962
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
67898/12
15/10/2012
Zejnel ČEKOVIĆ
16/01/1951
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
68020/12
11/10/2012
Hamida IBRAHIMOVIĆ
05/08/1961
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
68022/12
11/10/2012
Sabita REDŽOVIĆ
25/02/1966
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
68047/12
13/10/2012
Ramka KUČ
15/03/1962
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
69084/12
12/10/2012
Gordana MIJAILOVIĆ
21/08/1965
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
70968/12
17/10/2012
Grozdana ĐURKOVIĆ
15/05/1963
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
72995/12
01/11/2012
Ulfeta ĆOSOVIĆ
01/06/1948
Novi Pazar
Ismet KALIĆ
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025
