CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 9 décembre 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; 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 } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s376CDD9C { width:117.08pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Applications nos. 12371/21 and 18563/21 Anđa ĆAVAR and Ibrica PUCE against Bosnia and Herzegovina and Ljubica JURIĆ and Borka ŠUNJIĆ against Bosnia and Herzegovina (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 9   December 2021 as a Committee composed of:   Armen Harutyunyan, President,   Jolien Schukking,   Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the dates indicated in the appended table, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 concerning the non-enforcement of domestic decisions against the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina were communicated to the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina (“the Government”). Subsequently, the Government informed the Court that the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina had introduced on 8 April 2021 an action plan with a view to securing the enforcement of all domestic judgments against it. The plan stated that the debt was about 42,000,000 convertible marks (BAM) and that all judgments would be enforced, in chronological order, by 2030. The Government submitted that the matter had thus been resolved. The applicants disagreed and submitted that the enforcement time frame set by the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina was unreasonable.   THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. In a number of similar cases (see Muhović and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), nos. 40841/13 and 12 others, 15 September 2020, concerning the Zenica-Doboj Canton; Akeljić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), nos. 8039/19 and 24 others, 13 October 2020, concerning the Central Bosnia Canton; Šarganović and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), nos. 28251/18 and 19 others, 9 November 2020, concerning the Una-Sana Canton; and Lavić v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), no. 6340/20, 9 November 2020, concerning the Herzegovina-Neretva Canton) the Court held that enforcement time frames with a longer duration, where the final dates were set for 2041, 2032, 2040 and 2032, respectively, were acceptable. There is no reason to take a different approach in the present case. As in the cases cited above, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article   37 §   1   (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications under Article   37   §   1 in fine . Accordingly, the applications should be struck out of the list. This conclusion is, however, without any prejudice to the Court’s power to restore, pursuant to Article 37 § 2, the present or any other similar applications to the list of cases if the circumstances justify such a course (see Muhović and Others , cited above, § 37). For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases. Done in English and notified in writing on 13 January 2022.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Armen Harutyunyan   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Relevant domestic decision Year of enforcement according to the action plan     12371/21 12/02/2021 Anđa ĆAVAR 1961 Ibrica PUCE 1956 Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant ĆAVAR), 29/06/2015   Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant PUCE), 01/07/2015   Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant PUCE), 05/11/2018 2024     2024     2029     18563/21 26/03/2021 Ljubica JURIĆ 1954 Borka ŠUNJIĆ 1959 Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant ŠUNJIĆ), 22/06/2015   Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant JURIĆ), 14/01/2016   Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant JURIĆ), 13/12/2017   Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant ŠUNJIĆ), 13/12/2017   Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant JURIĆ), 31/10/2019   Sarajevo Municipal Court (applicant ŠUNJIĆ), 31/10/2019 2024     2026     2028     2028     2029     2029