Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

CASE OF MIHAJLOVIĆ AND OTHERS v. SERBIA

Doc ref: 11362/17;11366/17;11387/17;11481/17;58011/17;58021/17;59990/17;68618/17;71798/17;71930/17 • ECHR ID: 001-196179

Document date: October 3, 2019

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 6

CASE OF MIHAJLOVIĆ AND OTHERS v. SERBIA

Doc ref: 11362/17;11366/17;11387/17;11481/17;58011/17;58021/17;59990/17;68618/17;71798/17;71930/17 • ECHR ID: 001-196179

Document date: October 3, 2019

Cited paragraphs only

THIRD SECTION

CASE OF MIHAJLOVIĆ AND OTHERS v. SERBIA

( Application no. 11362/17 and 9 others -

see appended list )

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

3 October 2019

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Mihajlović and Others v. Serbia ,

The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting as a Committee composed of:

Dmitry Dedov, President, Alena Poláčková , Gilberto Felici , judges, and Liv Tigerstedt , Acting Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having deliberated in private on 12 September 2019 ,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against Serbia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table .

2. The applicants were represented by Ms T. Stojiljkovi ć , a lawyer practising in Leskovac .

3. The Serbian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.

THE FACTS

4. The list of applicant s and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

5. The applicant s complained of the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned companies .

THE LAW

6. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

7. The applicant s complained of the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given in their favour . They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, which, in the relevant part, read as follows:

Article 6 § 1

“In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by [a] ... tribunal ...”

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

“Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. ...”

8. The Court reiterates that the execution of a judgment given by any court must be regarded as an integral part of a “hearing” for the purposes of Article 6. It also refers to its case-law concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of final domestic judgments (see Hornsby v. Greece , no. 18357/91, § 40, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997 ‑ II).

9. In the leading cases of R. Kačapor and Others v. Serbia, nos. 2269/06 and 5 others, §§ 97-99, 106-16 and 119-20, 15 January 2008, Crnišanin and Others v. Serbia, nos. 35835/05 and 3 others, § 124, 13 January 2009, and Stevanovi ć and Others [Committee] , nos. 43815/17 and 15 others, 27 August 2019, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

10. The Court further notes that the decisions in the present applications ordered specific action to be taken. The Court therefore considers that the decisions in question constitute “possessions” within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

11. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the authorities did not deploy all necessary efforts to enforce in due time the decisions in the applicant s ’ favour.

12. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

13. 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.”

14. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, StoÅ¡ić v. Serbia, no. 64931/10, §§ 66-68, 1 October 2013), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table and it dismisses the remainder of the applicants ’ claims for just satisfaction.

15. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT , UNANIMOUSLY,

(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant s , within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 3 October 2019 , pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Liv Tigerstedt Dmitry Dedov

Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

( non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned companies )

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant ’ s name

Date of birth

Relevant domestic decision

Start date of non-enforcement period

End date of non-enforcement period Length of enforcement proceedings

Domestic award

(in euros)

Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1] [2]

11362/17

27/01/2017

Tomislav Mihajlović

25/10/1950

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 16/06/1998

05/05/2006

30/01/2017

10 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 26 day(s)

170

2,000

11366/17

27/01/2017

Bratislav Kostić

03/02/1961

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 03/06/2003

13/10/2004

02/03/2017

12 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 18 day(s)

85

2,000

11387/17

27/01/2017

Slavica Zdravković

09/05/1959

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 25/12/2006

12/01/2007

02/03/2017

10 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 19 day(s)

0

2,000

11481/17

31/01/2017

Jovan Nikolić

23/07/1961

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 25/03/2003

18/11/2004

10/04/2017

12 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 24 day(s)

85

2,000

58011/17

31/07/2017

Žikica Stojiljković

12/11/1954

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 23/02/2004

11/02/2008

10/08/2017

9 year(s) and 6 month(s)

300

2,000

58021/17

31/07/2017

Gordana Đorđević

22/12/1959

Municipal Court in Lesovac , 16/04/2003

09/01/2008

10/08/2017

9 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 2 day(s)

300

2,000

59990/17

04/08/2017

Slavica Mihajlović

19/11/1957

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 25/03/2003

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 31/01/2008

04/04/2008

17/07/2008

10/08/2017

9 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 7 day(s)

10/08/2017

9 year(s) and 25 day(s)

100

2,000

68618/17

04/09/2017

Lena Krstić

15/12/1978

Municipal Cout in Leskovac , 21/05/2003

17/03/2008

10/08/2017

9 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 25 day(s)

100

2,000

71798/17

21/09/2017

Jasmina Marković

24/08/1954

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 19/03/2003

25/11/2004

10/08/2017

12 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 17 day(s)

255

2,000

71930/17

21/09/2017

Mirjana Mitić

14/11/1960

Municipal Court in Leskovac , 16/05/2003

26/11/2007

10/08/2017

9 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 16 day(s)

255

2,000

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

[2] . Less any amounts which may have already been paid in that regard at the domestic level.

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846