CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 25 août 2022

.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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s6C5BED22 { margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5E8F5A28 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .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 } .sE13162EA { width:134.76pt; 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 } .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 }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 23200/20 Branka BELIĆ BABIĆ against Serbia and 25 other applications (see appended table)   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 25   August 2022 as a Committee composed of: Jovan Ilievski , President, Gilberto Felici , Diana Sârcu , judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants were represented by Mr R. Čakara, a lawyer practising in Novi Pazar. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given against a socially/State-owned company were communicated to the Serbian Government (“the Government”) on 20 May 2021. THE LAW Joinder of the applications Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. Complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned companies) The Government submitted that the final domestic decisions in the applicants’ favour had actually been enforced. They therefore suggested that the Court reject the applications as an abuse of the right of individual application in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention. The applicants did not dispute that fact. The Court reiterates that an application may be rejected as an abuse of the right of individual application within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention if, among other reasons, it was knowingly based on false information or if significant information and documents were deliberately omitted, either where they were known from the outset or where new significant developments occurred during the proceedings. Incomplete and therefore misleading information may amount to an abuse of the right of application, especially if the information in question concerns the very core of the case and no sufficient explanation is given for the failure to disclose that information (see Gross v. Switzerland [GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014; S.A.S. v. France [GC], no. 43835/11, § 67, ECHR 2014; and Nikolić and Others v. Serbia (dec.) [Committee], nos. 48162/18 and 8 others, 21   January 2021). Turning to the present case, the Court observes that between 15 December 2020 and 22 February 2021 the sums awarded in the domestic decisions at issue were paid by the State in accordance with the domestic law (see Stevanović and Others v. Serbia , nos. 43815/17 and 15 others, § 17, 27   August 2019). The applicants did not inform the Court about that development before notice of the applications was given to the Government and no explanation for this omission was provided. Having regard to the fact that the information withheld concerned the very core of the applications, the Court finds that such conduct was contrary to the purpose of the right of individual application. Lawyers must understand that, having due regard to the Court’s duty to examine allegations of human rights violations, they must show a high level of professional prudence and meaningful cooperation with the Court by sparing it the introduction of unmeritorious complaints and, both before proceedings have been instituted and thereafter, they must inquire diligently into all the details of the case, meticulously abide by all the relevant rules of procedure and must urge their clients to do the same. Otherwise, the wilful or negligent misuse of the Court’s resources may undermine the credibility of lawyers’ work in the eyes of the Court and even, if it occurs systematically, may result in particular individual lawyers being banned from representing applicants under Rule 36   § 4 (b) of the Rules of Court (see Stevančević v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), no. 67618/09, § 29, 10 January 2017). In view of the above, the Court finds that these applications constitute an abuse of the right of individual application and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 15 September 2022.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Jovan Ilievski   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 given against socially/State-owned companies) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Relevant domestic decision Start date of non-enforcement period or date of entry into force of the Convention in respect of Serbia (3 March 2004) Date   of enforcement of domestic decisions     23200/20 04/06/2020 Branka BELIĆ BABIĆ 1964 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021     23201/20 04/06/2020 Muamera RAMČIĆ 1954 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021     25248/20 28/05/2020 Semir KAMBOVIĆ 1988 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021     25431/20 10/06/2020 Milica KLISARIĆ - SARIĆ 1962 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021     25432/20 10/06/2020 Sabaheta ŠAĆIROVIĆ NUROVIĆ 1960 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021     25566/20 11/06/2020 Ismeta ROŽAJAC 1957 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   15/12/2020     25649/20 02/06/2020 Miladija ĐURKOVIĆ 1969 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021     25741/20 05/06/2020 Ismet ŠUSTERAC 1954 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021     25841/20 09/06/2020 Radomirka PETROVIĆ 1961 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   25842/20 09/06/2020 Sadija BRUNČEVIĆ KAČAR 1964 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   25856/20 01/06/2020 Hamo VATIĆ 1950 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   15/12/2020   25862/20 03/06/2020 Cmiljana VULOVIĆ 1958 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   26763/20 09/06/2020 Senabija ĐUKIĆ 1963 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   15/12/2020   26767/20 09/06/2020 Senada FERIZOVIĆ BAHTIJAREVIĆ 1966 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   26770/20 09/06/2020 Bećira BILALOVIĆ 1970 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   15/12/2020   26778/20 09/06/2020 Nusreta HASIĆ 1960 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   26808/20 02/06/2020 Slobodan VRANIĆ 1970 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   26814/20 12/06/2020 Mladen MAKOJEVIĆ 1974 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   26858/20 03/06/2020 Mujesira ZAIMOVIĆ 1958 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003 03/03/2004   15/12/2020   26868/20 05/06/2020 Darko MARKOVIĆ 1973 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   15/12/2020   26870/20 05/06/2020 Sanija HAMIDOVIĆ 1972 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   15/12/2020   30881/20 23/06/2020 Rada MILOJEVIĆ 1966 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   22/02/2021   31760/20 23/06/2020 Sejdo MEHMEDOVIĆ 1946 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   32852/20 16/07/2020 Mevljuda LATOVIĆ 1969 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   32887/20 20/07/2020 Ljiljana MIJAILOVIĆ 1967 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021   33046/20 16/07/2020 Adem MURIĆ 1962 Commercial Court in Kraljevo, 27/11/2003   03/03/2004   19/02/2021