CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 18 juillet 2024

.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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .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 } .s28F0D84C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sE157FEB0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; 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 } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sF1F8E4D4 { width:130.09pt; display:inline-block } .s5D826FD4 { width:25.88pt; display:inline-block } .s1B61D60 { width:156.43pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sCC22C24E { font-family:Arial; color:#3e3e3e } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s26725EEE { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sC67E2A55 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; text-decoration:underline; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }       FIRST SECTION CASE OF ŽIVALJEVIĆ AND OTHERS v. MONTENEGRO (Application no. 55668/19)             JUDGMENT This version was rectified on 17 October 2024 under Rule 81 of the Rules of Court.     STRASBOURG 18 July 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Živaljević and Others v. Montenegro, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Péter Paczolay , President ,   Gilberto Felici,   Raffaele Sabato , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 27 June 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.     The case originated in an application against Montenegro lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 9 October 2019. 2.     The applicants were represented by Mr Lj. Marković, a lawyer practising in Podgorica. 3.     The Montenegrin Government (“the   Government”) were given notice of the application. THE FACTS 4.     The applicants’ details and information relevant to the application are set out in the appended table. 5.     The applicants complained of the non-enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned companies. 6 .     On 25 June 2019 the Constitutional Court found a violation of the applicants’ rights under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on account of non-enforcement. The applicants were awarded 2,000 euros (EUR) each in non-pecuniary damage. 7 .     In 2021, in the insolvency proceedings against a debtor, the insolvency administrator rendered decisions accepting the applicants’ claims. These decisions have not yet become final. 8 .     The domestic decisions under consideration remain unenforced. THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION AND OF ARTICLE   1 OF PROTOCOL No.   1 9.     The applicants complained principally of the non-enforcement of domestic decisions given in their favour. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and on Article   1 of Protocol No.   1. 10 .     The Government submitted that the applicants had failed to inform the Court about the insolvency administrator’s decisions (see paragraph 7 above) and invited it to reject the application as an abuse of the right of individual application in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention. 11.     The Court reiterates that the execution of a judgment given by any court must be regarded as an integral part of a “hearing” for the purposes of Article   6. It also refers to its case-law concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of final domestic judgments (see Hornsby v.   Greece , no.   18357/91, §   40, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997 ‑ II). 12.     The Court further notes that the decisions in the present case ordered specific action to be taken. The Court therefore considers that the decisions in question constitute “possessions” within the meaning of Article   1 of Protocol No.   1. 13.     In the leading cases of R. Kačapor and Others v. Serbia (nos. 2269/06 and 5 others, §§ 97-99, 106-16 and 119-20, 15 January 2008), and Mijanović v. Montenegro (no. 19580/06, §§ 81-91, 17 September 2013), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 14.     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. In particular, as regards the Government’s argument (see paragraph 10 above), the Court notes that the insolvency administrator’s decisions have not yet become final and are thus not enforced. Therefore, the information in question did not concern the very core of the case as it is undisputed between the parties that the final decisions in the applicants’ favour under consideration remain unenforced (see paragraph 8 above). The Government’s objection must therefore be rejected. 15.     Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the authorities did not deploy all necessary efforts to enforce fully and in due time the decisions in the applicants’ favour. 16.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No.   1. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 17.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and its own case ‑ law (see, in particular, R. Kačapor and Others , cited above , §§ 123-26; Stošić v. Serbia, no. 64931/10, §§ 66-68, 1 October 2013 ; and Mastilović and Others v. Montenegr o , no. 28754/10, § 52, 24 February 2022) the Court considers it reasonable not to award the applicants compensation in respect of non ‑ pecuniary damage because it has already been awarded domestically (see paragraph 6 above), but to award them a sum for costs and expenses indicated in the appended table. 18.     The Court further notes that the respondent State has an outstanding obligation to enforce the judgments which remain enforceable.   FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Declares the application admissible; Holds that this application discloses a breach of Article   6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No.   1 concerning the non ‑ enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned companies; Holds that the respondent State shall ensure, by appropriate means, within three months, the enforcement of the pending domestic decisions referred to in the appended table; Holds (a)   that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amount indicated in the appended table in respect of costs and expenses, 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 amount 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 18 July 2024, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Péter Paczolay   Deputy Registrar   President       APPENDIX Application 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) The applicants are represented before the Court by Mr Ljubomir Marković, a lawyer practicing in Podgorica.   Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Relevant domestic decision Start date of non-enforcement period   End date of non-enforcement period   Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros) [1] 55668/19   09/10/2019 (88   applicants) Miodrag ŽIVALJEVIĆ 1956   Milan ASANOVIĆ 1958   Gordana BAJIĆ 1968   Milorad BOGOJEVIĆ 1956   Vasilije BOLJEVIĆ 1946   Vasilije BOLJEVIĆ 1948   Branislav BOROVINIĆ 1947   Radenko BOŠKOVIĆ 1955   Goran BUBANJA 1968   Dragan BULATOVIĆ 1974   Mirko BULATOVIĆ 1967   Slavko CEKOVIĆ 1966   Zoran ČOVIĆ 1991   Miodrag ĆUPIĆ 1955   Zvezdana DABANOVIĆ 1947   Zef DEDIVANOVIĆ 1951   Đevad DELJANIN 1943   Milutin ĐOROJEVIĆ 1948   Milutin ĐUKANOVIĆ 1947 Zoran ĐUKANOVIĆ 1957   Miodrag DUMOVIĆ 1941   Golub GOLUBOVIĆ 1968   Vojka GOLUBOVIĆ 1945   Slavica GRGUROVIĆ 1960   Pero GRUJIĆ 1969   Bisera HAROVIĆ 1944   Željko ILIĆ 1955   Marinko IVANOVIĆ 1971   [2]     Miloš IVANOVIĆ 1962   Radomir IVANOVIĆ 1976 Saveta IVANOVIĆ 1952   Radivoje JOVANOVIĆ 1946   Radomir JOVANOVIĆ 1958   Radovan JOVANOVIĆ 1956   Veselinka JUŠKOVIĆ 1949   Kosa KAŽIĆ 1963   Špiro KLIKOVAC 1947   Veseljko KLJAJIĆ 1967   Ilija KNEŽEVIĆ 1941   Vojko KNEŽEVIĆ 1941   Selman LJAČEVIĆ 1952       Stojanka MAKOČEVIĆ 1940   Milan MARAŠ 1958   Miodrag MARKOVIĆ 1957   Zlatko MARKOVIĆ 1985   Vjera MIJATOVIĆ 1952   Danilo MIKULIĆ 1940   Radovan MILOŠEVIĆ 1939   Milorad MIRANOVIĆ 1949   Biljana MITROVIĆ 1961   Bosa MUGOŠA 1946   Srđan NIKČEVIĆ 1968   Milenko NOVAKOVIĆ 1956   Željko NOVIĆEVIĆ 1971   Gojko PAJOVIĆ 1947   Radomir PAJOVIĆ 1948   Đon PALJAJ 1960   Milka PAVIĆEVIĆ 1963   Zoran PEJOVIĆ 1962   Velibor POLEKSIĆ 1954   Raško RADEVIĆ 1954   Milan RADINOVIĆ 1939   Miodrag RADINOVIĆ 1957   Nenad RADINOVIĆ 1957     Đorđije RADONJIĆ 1950   Mihailo RADOVIĆ 1938   Predrag RADULOVIĆ 1975   Vaso RADUNOVIĆ 1980   Ljubomir RAJOVIĆ 1952   Sado RAMOVIĆ 1955   Isah RASTODER 1954   Slobodanka RONDOVIĆ 1943   Izet ŠABOVIĆ 1982   Milan ŠALETIĆ 1968   Velimir ŠĆEPANOVIĆ 1942   Momo STIJEPOVIĆ 1952   Mirko STOJANOVIĆ 1966   Aco ŠUŠKAVČEVIĆ 1957   Mesudin TALJANOVIĆ 1966   Danilo TOMIĆ 1951   Bajram TUZOVIĆ 1954   Savo USKOKOVIĆ 1948   Nevena VUJAČIĆ 1963   Zorica VUJOŠEVIĆ 1951   Mirjana VUKOVIĆ 1966   Veselin VUKSANOVIĆ 1964   Predrag VULETIĆ 1952 Court of First Instance Podgorica, 29/10/2007   Court of First Instance Podgorica, 20/05/2009   Supreme Court 14/04/2009     Court of First Instance Podgorica, 20/05/2009   High Court Podgorica 05/05/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica, 24/09/2007   High Court Podgorica 28/04/2009   Supreme Court 31/03/2009   Supreme Court 06/06/2009   Supreme Court 06/06/2009   High Court Podgorica 22/06/2009   High Court Podgorica 30/06/2009   High Court Podgorica 10/07/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 01/06/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 25/05/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 22/07/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 22/07/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 22/07/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 17/02/2009 Court of First Instance Podgorica 24/11/2009   Supreme Court 04/11/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 10/10/2009   Court of First Inst ancePodgorica 22/03/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 22/03/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 21/04/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 22/07/2009   Court of First Instance Podgorica 09/04/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 09/04/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 09/04/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 16/03/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 24/03/2010 Court of First Instance Podgorica 30/03/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 10/04/2007   Court of First Instance Podgorica 29/04/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 28/04/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 19/07/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 07/10/2010   Court of First Instance Podgorica 21/03/2011   Court of First Instance Podgorica 16/06/2011   Court of First Instance Podgorica 15/03/2010   High Court Podgorica 22/04/2010   Commercial Court 16/10/2017       Commercial Court 28/11/2017   16/05/2009     20/05/2009     04/06/2009     16/06/2009     16/06/2009     18/06/2009     19/06/2009     02/07/2009     02/07/2009     02/07/2009     22/07/2009     11/09/2009     16/09/2009     15/10/2009     09/11/2009     28/11/2009     02/12/2009     02/12/2009     24/12/2009   17/03/2010     07/04/2010     07/04/2010     10/04/2010     12/04/2010     12/04/2010     12/04/2010     12/04/2010     12/04/2010     12/04/2010     14/04/2010     12/05/2010   15/05/2010     17/05/2010     17/05/2010     27/05/2010     07/09/2010     08/03/2011     01/04/2011     23/06/2011     16/10/2017     12/05/2010     16/10/2017         28/11/2017   pending more than 15 years and 18 days     pending more than 15 years and 14 days     pending more than 15 years     pending more than 14 years, 11 months and 18 days     pending more than 14 years, 11 months and 18 days     pending more than 14 years, 11 months and 16 days     pending more than 14 years, 11 months and 15 days     pending more than 14 years, 11 months and 1 day     pending more than 14 years, 11 months and 1 day     pending more than 14 years, 11 months and 1 day     pending more than 14 years, 10 months and 12 days     pending more than 14 years, 8 months and 23 days     pending more than 14 years, 8 months and 18 days     pending more than 14 years, 7 months and 19 days     pending more than 14 years, 6 months and 25 days     pending more than 14 years, 6 months and 6 days     pending more than 14 years, 6 months and 1 day     pending more than 14 years, 6 months and 1 day     pending more than 14 years, 5 months and 10 days   pending more than 14 years, 2 months and 17 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 27 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 27 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 24 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 22 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 22 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 22 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 22 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 22 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 22 days     pending more than 14 years, 1 month and 20 days     pending more than 14 years and 22 days   pending more than 14 years and 19 days     pending more than 14 years and 17 days     pending more than 14 years and 17 days     pending more than 14 years and 7 days     pending more than 13 years, 8 months and 27 days     pending more than 13 years, 2 months and 26 days     pending more than 13 years, 2 months and 2 days     pending more than 12 years, 10 months and 11 days     pending more than 6 years, 7 months and 18 days     pending more than 14 years and 22 days     pending more than 6 years, 7 months and 18 days         pending more than 6 years, 6 months and 6 days       250   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants. [2] Rectified on 17 October 2024: the name of Mr Marko Ivanović was removed from the table.