CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 2 décembre 2008

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sE5338F84 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s53D63747 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:36pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s867F9C1B { width:175.28pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 8757/05 by Slobodan IVANOVSKI against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 2   December 2008 as a Chamber composed of:   Peer Lorenzen, President,   Rait Maruste,   Karel Jungwiert,   Renate Jaeger,   Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre,   Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,   Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 February 2005, Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 30 June 2008 requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicant's reply to that declaration, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Slobodan Ivanovski, is a Macedonian national who was born in 1950 and lives in Skopje. He also has Croatian citizenship. The Macedonian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mrs R. Lazareska Gerovska. The application concerns a labour dispute in which the applicant claimed annulment of his dismissal. The proceedings in question started on 24   July   1995 and ended on 9 September 2004, when the Supreme Court's decision of 17 June 2004 was served on the applicant. COMPLAINTS The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention that his case had not been heard within a reasonable time, that he had not been given a fair trial and that impugned decisions had not been reasoned. The applicant complained also under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention that the proceedings in question had violated his property rights. THE LAW 1. The applicant complained about the length of the proceedings. By letter dated 30 June 2008, the respondent Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issue raised by this part of the application. They acknowledged that in the circumstances of the case the length of the domestic proceedings did not fulfil the requirement of reasonable time under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and that they were prepared to pay to the applicant the global sum of 1,680 euros. They further requested the Court to strike out this part of the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention. In a letter received by the Court on 16 September 2008 the applicant stated that the sum mentioned in the Government's declaration was unacceptably low. He also declared that he waives his complaint regarding the length of the proceedings and asked the Court to examine his other complaints. The Court, having regard to the unequivocal statement made by the applicant and notwithstanding the Government's declaration, observes that the applicant has lost interest in pursuing his application regarding the length complaint with the Court. Furthermore, in accordance with Article   37 § 1 in fine , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case. The Court decides to strike this part of the application out of the list of cases.   2. The applicant further complained that the domestic proceedings had been unfair. He invoked Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention alleging that the impugned proceedings had affected his property rights. The Court has examined the remainder of the complaints as submitted by the applicant. However, having regard to all the material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, the Court finds that the applicant has failed to substantiate his complaints. It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in so far as it relates to the length-of-proceedings complaint in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention; Declares the remainder of the application inadmissible. Claudia Westerdiek   Peer Lorenzen   Registrar   President