CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 avril 2014

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s34D46E87 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sF7A86111 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; font-size:10pt } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both }     Communicated on 17 April 2014   THIRD SECTION Application no. 16053/09 Petru ANDREI against Romania lodged on 16 March 2009 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Petru Andrei, is a Romanian national, who was born in   1954 and lives in Miroslava, Iaşi County. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 20 October 2003, the applicant brought proceedings against third parties seeking to force them to sell him a plot of land of 2,500 sq. m., which was promised by their antecessor in 1994, or else to annul the previous agreement and return him the money that he already paid (350,000   old Romanian lei (ROL)). By a judgment of 8 October 2007 the Iaşi District Court, acting as a court of first instance, partly allowed the applicant’s action on the merits and acknowledged his right to receive the money back. The applicant appealed against the judgment because he wanted the plot of land or his market value, instead of the money that he paid. By a judgment of 2 June 2008 the Iaşi   County Court, sitting as a bench of two judges, dismissed the appeal. The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law ( recurs ) against this judgment. By a final judgment of 14 November 2008 the Iaşi Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal on points of law as inadmissible without touching on the merits of the case. The court held that, according to the applicable legal provisions in force at the time, the applicant’s case was subject to examination at only two levels of jurisdiction, and that therefore the judgment of the Iaşi County Court was final, even if the County Court had erred and had examined the applicant’s case in a composition of two rather than three judges. B.     Relevant domestic law The relevant parts of the Romanian Code of Civil Procedure, as in force at the material time, read as follows: Article 281¹ § 1 “No [ordinary] appeal shall lie against judgments rendered by the courts of first   instance in (...) civil cases where the subject matter of the litigation amounts to less than RON   100,000.” Article 299 § 1 “Judgments not subject to [an ordinary] appeal (...) are subject to an appeal on points   of law.” Article 312 § 3 taken together with Article 304 point 1 “The court adjudicating on an appeal on points of law shall quash the judgments of the lower courts where such judgments were delivered by courts not sitting in the judicial formation prescribed by law.” The relevant part of the Administration of Justice Act (Law   no.   304/2004), as in force at the material time, reads as follows: Section 54(2) “ Appeals shall be examined by benches of two judges, and appeals on points of law by benches of three judges.” COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 that the composition of the bench delivering the judgment of the Iaşi County Court was not in accordance with the law, that the domestic courts lacked impartiality and that identical cases have been decided at three levels of jurisdiction by the domestic courts. The applicant complains under Article 13 of the Convention that he did not have an effective remedy to redress the violation of Article 6 described above. The applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that his right of property was breached by the domestic courts in so far as she had been deprived of the promised plot of land.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Taking into consideration the composition of the bench of judges, was the Iaşi County Court, which gave the judgment of 8 October 2007, a “tribunal established by law” within the meaning of Article   6 §   1 of the Convention?   2.     Has the applicant suffered a significant disadvantage within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (b) of the Convention as a result of the examination of his appeal on points of law by a bench of two judges?