Communicated on 28 August 2017 and 3 September 2020 Published on 21 September 2020

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 50609/10 Emma KIRAKOSYAN against Armenia lodged on 23 August 2010

The facts and complaints in this application have been summarised in the Court ’ s Statement of facts and Questions to the parties , which is available in HUDOC.

QUESTIONS

1. Having regard to the findings of the Court of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan in its judgment of 30 March 2018 as upheld in the final instance by the Court of Cassation on 12 December 2018, has the judgment of the Civil Court of Appeal of 3 March 2005 been fully and timely enforced? If not, is this fact compatible with the requirements of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Fuklev v. Ukraine , no. 71186/01, §§ 67 and 84, 7 June 2005; Ruianu v. Romania , no. 34647/97, § 66, 17 June 2003?

2. If the judgment of the Civil Court of Appeal of 3 March 2005 has not been fully enforced, is its continuing non-enforcement compatible with the applicant ’ s right to the peaceful enjoyment of her possessions within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (see Kesyan v. Russia , no. 36496/02, § 80, 19 October 2006)?

3. Did the applicant have at her disposal an effective domestic remedy for her complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, as required by Article 13 of the Convention (see Fuklev , cited above, § 87)?