Analiza slučaja pred Evropskim sudom za ljudska prava
Evropska Konvencija o ljudskim pravima
Praktični vodič za primenu Evropske konvencije o ljudskim pravima
Priručnici i vodiči kroz praksu Evropskog suda za ljudska prava
Evropski sud za ljudska prava u 50 pitanja
Glosar Evropske Konvencije o ljudskim pravima
Nacionalna mreža sudija i tužilaca za primenu standarda Evropskog suda za ljudska prava
Preuzmite presudu u pdf formatu
EVROPSKI SUD ZA LJUDSKA PRAVA
ČETVRTI ODJEL
PREDMET HADŽAJLIĆ I DRUGI protiv BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE
(Aplikacije br. 10770/18 i 2 druga - vidi listu u dodatku)
PRESUDA
STRASBOURG
16.01.2020. godine
Ova presuda je konačna ali su u njoj moguće uredničke izmjene.
U predmetu Hadžajlić i drugi protiv Bosne i Hercegovine, Evropski sud za ljudska prava (Četvrti odjel), zasjedajući kao odbor u sastavu:
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, predsjednica,
Georges Ravarani,
Jolien Schukking, sudije,
i Liv Tigerstedt, v.d. zamjenik registrara Odjela,
nakon vijećanja zatvorenog za javnost održanog 12.12.2019. godine, donosi je sljedeću presudu koja je usvojena navedenog datuma:
POSTUPAK
ČINJENICE
PRAVO
I SPAJANJE APLIKACIJA
II NAVODNA POVREDA ČLANA 6. STAV 1. KONVENCIJE
Član 6. stav 1.
„Prilikom odlučivanja o njegovim građanskim pravima i obavezama ... svako ima pravo na ...suđenje u razumnom roku....pred ...sudom...“
III PRIMJENA ČLANA 41. KONVENCIJE
IZ NAVEDENIH RAZLOGA SUD JE JEDNOGLASNO
Odlučio spojiti aplikacije;
Proglasio aplikacije dopuštenim;
Utvrdio da ove aplikacije ukazuju na povredu člana 6. stav 1. Konvencije u odnosu na prekomjernu dužinu parničnog i upravnog postupka;
Utvrdio
(a) da tužena država, u roku od tri mjeseca, ima aplikantima isplatiti iznose navedene u tabeli koja se nalazi u dodatku, pretvorene u valutu tužene države prema tečaju na dan izmirenja;
(b) da će se od isteka navedenog roka od tri mjeseca do izmirenja, na navedene iznose plaćati obična kamata po stopi jednakoj najnižoj kreditnoj stopi Evropske centralne banke u periodu neplaćanja, uvećanoj za tri postotna boda.
Sačinjeno na engleskom jeziku i dostavljeno u pisanom obliku dana 16.01.2020. godine, u skladu s pravilom 77. stavovi 2. i 3. Pravila Suda.
Liv Tigerstedt Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström
v.d. zamjenik registrara predsjednica
DODATAK
Lista aplikacija sa pritužbama prema članu 6. stav 1. Konvencije (prekomjerna dužina parničnog i/ili administrativnog postupka)
|
Br. |
Broj aplikacije i Datum podnošenja |
Ime i prezime aplikanta Datum rođenja |
Zastupnik i njegovo sjedište |
Početak postupka ili datum stupanja na snagu Konvencije za Bosnu i Hercegovinu (12.07. 2002.) |
Okončanje postupka |
Ukupna dužina Nivoi nadležnosti |
Iznos dosuđen na ime nematerijalne štete po aplikantu (u eurima)[1] [2] |
Iznos dosuđen na ime troškova i izdataka po aplikaciji (u eurima)[3] |
|
1. |
10770/18 20/02/2018 |
Alija HADŽAJLIĆ 12/07/1956 |
Milošević Miroslav Ruma |
12/07/2002
|
U toku
|
Više od 17 godina i 4 mjeseca i 9 dana 1 nivo nadležnosti |
5.900 |
350 |
|
2. |
17023/18 26/03/2018 |
Bahrudin ARIFOVIĆ 26/03/1956 |
Salkanović Haris Živinice |
29/07/2004
|
07/09/2015
|
11 godina i 1 mjesec i 10 dana 2 nivoa nadležnosti |
3.600 |
350 |
|
3. |
36786/18 19/07/2018 |
Slobodan NIKOLIĆ 01/05/1945 |
Poropat Senija Sarajevo |
20/06/2005
|
U toku
|
Više od 14 godina i 5 mjeseci i 1 dan 1 nivo nadležnosti |
6.600 |
350 |
[1] . Plus svaki porez koji se aplikantima može zaračunati.
[2] . Umanjeno za svaki iznos koji je eventualno već plaćen u tom pogledu na domaćem nivou.
[3] . Plus svaki porez koji se aplikantima može zaračunati.
___________________________________
Prevod presude preuzet sa https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/
FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF HADŽAJLIĆ AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
(Application nos. 10770/18 and 2 others -see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
16 January 2020
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Hadžajlić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, President,
Georges Ravarani,
Jolien Schukking, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 12 December 2019, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Bosnia and Herzegovina 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 Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicants complained of the excessive length of civil and administrative proceedings.
THE LAW
5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
6. The applicants complained that the length of the proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
Article 6 § 1
“In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal ...”
7. The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
8. In the leading cases of Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 134-227, ECHR 2006-V, and Dorić v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [Committee], no. 68811/13, 7 November 2017, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
9. 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 length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
11. 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.”
12. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 260-73, ECHR 2006-V, and Dorić v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [Committee], no. 68811/13, 7 November 2017), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
13. 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 applicants, 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 16 January 2020, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Liv Tigerstedt Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of civil and/or administrative proceedings)
|
No. |
Application no. Date of introduction |
Applicant’s name Date of birth |
Representative’s name and location |
Start of proceedings or date of entry into force of the Convention in respect of Bosnia and Herzegovina (12 July 2002) |
End of proceedings |
Total length Levels of jurisdiction |
Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage per applicant (in euros)[1] [2] |
Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros)[3] |
|
10770/18 20/02/2018 |
Alija HADŽAJLIĆ 12/07/1956 |
Milošević Miroslav Ruma |
12/07/2002 |
pending |
More than 17 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 9 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction |
5,900 |
350 |
|
|
17023/18 26/03/2018 |
Bahrudin ARIFOVIĆ 26/03/1956 |
Salkanović Haris Živinice |
29/07/2004 |
07/09/2015 |
11 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 10 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction |
3,600 |
350 |
|
|
36786/18 19/07/2018 |
Slobodan NIKOLIĆ 01/05/1945 |
Poropat Senija Sarajevo |
20/06/2005 |
pending |
More than 14 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 1 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction |
6,600 |
350 |
[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.
[3]. Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
baza unakrsnih veza