PUCKO PETROL IMPORT-EXPORT DOOEL v. NORTH MACEDONIA and 4 other applications
Doc ref: 6381/20;15860/20;38176/20;38665/20;44819/20 • ECHR ID: 001-222860
Document date: January 3, 2023
- 0 Inbound citations:
- •
- 0 Cited paragraphs:
- •
- 5 Outbound citations:
Published on 23 January 2023
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 6381/20 PUCKO PETROL IMPORT-EXPORT DOOEL against North Macedonia and 4 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 3 January 2023
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applications concern the non-enforcement of final judgments and decisions ordering a State-owned enterprise for national roads and motorways (applications nos. 38665/20, 15860/20 and 38176/20) and a State-run student dorm (applications nos. 6381/20 and 44819/20) to pay the applicants different amounts of money.
The President of the Skopje Court of First Instance found in separate decisions that a final decision against the above debtors can be executed only on the surplus of assets exceeding the amount of minimum indispensable assets necessary for the performance of their duties (established by an expert report).
The applicants complain under Articles 6 § 1 (except in application no. 38665/20) and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 thereto about the non-enforcement of the final judgments and decisions in their favour and about the lack of an effective remedy to challenge the decisions of the trial court’s president.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (except in application no. 38665/20) and/or Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on account of the applicants’ inability to enforce the final judgments and decisions in their favour (see Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy [GC], no. 22774/93, §§ 44-59 and 62-75, ECHR 1999-V; Burdov v. Russia , no. 59498/00, §§ 34-38 and 40-42, ECHR 2002-III; Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, §§ 65-70 and 86-88, ECHR 2009, and Kuzhelev and Others v. Russia , nos. 64098/09 and 6 others, §§ 109-110, 15 October 2019)? In this connection, were the decisions by the President of the Skopje Court of First Instance compatible with the requirements of these Articles of the Convention?
2. Did the applicants have at their disposal effective domestic remedies for their complaints under Article 6 (except in application no. 38665/20) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention (see Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, §§ 96-117 , ECHR 2009)?
APPENDIX
List of applications
No.
Application no.
Lodged on
Applicant Year of Birth/Registration Place of Residence
Represented by
1.
6381/20
22/01/2020
PUCKO PETROL IMPORT-EXPORT DOOEL
1999 Plasnica
Nikola DODEVSKI
2.
38665/20
27/08/2020
S.KOM DOOEL
2003 Skopje
Zharko HADJI-ZAFIROV
3.
15860/20
12/02/2020
Elena NIKCHEVSKA 1982 Skopje Jasmina VASILKOVSKA 1979 Skopjе
Dejan BOGDANOV
4.
38176/20
19/08/2020
AGROVOJVODINA-MEHANIZACIJA NS DOOEL
1998 Skopje
5.
44819/20
29/09/2020
SPECIAL PRODUCT DOOEL SKOPJE
2004 Skopje