Communicated on 4 May 2016

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 52185/14 Katica KMONIÄŒEK against Croatia lodged on 16 July 2014

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Ms Katica Kmoniček , is a Croatian national who was born in 1967 and lives in Antunovac . She is represented before the Court by Mr S. Nedić , a lawyer practising in Osijek.

The circumstances of the case

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

The applicant ’ s husband, B.K., was a Croatian soldier. He died on 22 February 1992 during the war in Croatia. The applicant, as his widow and the mother of his child, obtained the right to a survivor ’ s pension after her husband ’ s death.

On 7 April 2010 the applicant lost the right to a survivor ’ s pension on the grounds that she had entered into a partnership with another man and that, under the legislation then in effect, that was an obstacle to her receiving further pension payments.

On 17 December 2012 amendments to the Rights of Croatian War Veterans Act entered into force, which provided that widows who remarried or entered into a partnership with another person would not lose their rights under that Act on the basis of their status as a family member of a deceased Croatian war veteran.

In 2013 the applicant asked that her right to a survivor ’ s pension be reinstated from that point forward. The request was denied on the grounds that she had already lost that right before the 2012 amendments. The decisions of the administrative authorities were upheld by the Administrative Court on 24 October 2013.

The applicant subsequently lodged a constitutional complaint, which was dismissed on 12 March 2014.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains that she was discriminated against in connection with her right to a survivor ’ s pension in comparison to widows who remarried or entered into a partnership after the enactment of the 2012 amendments.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has the applicant suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of her Convention rights on the grounds of her partnership, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1?

2. In particular, has the applicant been subjected to a difference in treatment in comparison to widows and widowers of Croatian war veterans who entered into a partnership with another person after 17 December 2012? If so, did that difference in treatment pursue a legitimate aim, and was there a reasonable justification?