CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 2 février 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .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 } .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 } .s459D9084 { width:131.09pt; 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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 45127/21 Robert GRABOVIČKIĆ against Croatia (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 2   February 2023 as a Committee composed of:   Frédéric Krenc , President ,   Diana Sârcu,   Davor Derenčinović , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 3   September 2021, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table. The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings were communicated to the Croatian Government (“the Government”). THE LAW In the present application, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers, in the light of the criteria established in its case-law on the question of “reasonable time” (the complexity of the case, the applicant’s conduct and that of the competent authorities), that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the length of the civil proceedings instituted by the applicant. The Court notes that the proceedings were complex, as both the applicant (who resided in the United States) and the defendant lived abroad, which affected both the first-instance court’s communication with the parties, as well as the frequency at which the hearings were scheduled. Further to this, that court accommodated the applicant’s request to attend hearings in person and thus scheduled them at his convenience. On two such occasions, the hearings which had been adjourned at the applicant’s request were rescheduled within a one-year interval, thus causing a delay of two years. In addition, it took the applicant some seven months to submit to the first ‑ instance court translation of the documents enclosed with his statement of claim. In these circumstances, even though the proceedings before the first ‑ instance court lasted for five and a half years, their length in that period was mainly attributable to the applicant and to the complexity of the case. In the subsequent period the proceedings lasted three years and one month before three levels of jurisdiction, which cannot be considered excessive. The Court therefore finds that in the proceedings in question the domestic courts complied with the reasonable-time requirement (compare Martika v.   Greece (dec.), no. 51045/99, 22 May 2001; Sergi v. Italy (dec.), no.   46998/99, 26 September 2000; and Barelli v. France (dec.), no. 46246/99, 23 May 2000). It follows that the present application is inadmissible under Article   35   §   3   (a) of the Convention as manifestly ill-founded and that it must be rejected pursuant to Article 35 § 4 thereof. In view of this conclusion, the Court does not find it necessary to examine the Government’s remaining objection as to the admissibility based on non ‑ exhaustion of domestic remedies. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Declares the application inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 2 March 2023.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Frédéric Krenc   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX Application raising complaints under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of civil proceedings) Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Relevant starting date End of proceedings Total length Levels of jurisdiction Domestic court / file number 45127/21 03/09/2021 Robert GRABOVIČKIĆ 1968 26/10/2012   29/06/2021   8 years and 8 months 4 levels of jurisdiction   Zagreb Municipal Civil Court, no. P-6695/12