CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 8 mars 2016

.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 } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .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 } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s40B7A780 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s8BB6D734 { margin-right:9pt; margin-left:9pt; border-collapse:collapse; } .s9866263B { height:20.7pt } .s552884F1 { border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.4pt; padding-left:5.4pt; vertical-align:middle } .s13D2F625 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sDD8F0D07 { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .sDDD834DF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.4pt; vertical-align:middle } .s203A756B { height:52.05pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sFFAC2F38 { height:30pt } .s46049353 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.4pt; vertical-align:middle } .sD9DA4DFD { height:45pt } .s1DE04BC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } .s1C2B10C2 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s944BDE53 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt }   Communicated on 8 March 2016   THIRD SECTION Application no. 4603/11 Margita CIRNEROVÁ and 31 Others against Slovakia lodged on 14 January 2011 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicants are thirty-two Slovak nationals whose particulars are set out in the annexed table. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. On 27 November 1987 a claim was lodged against the applicants or their predecessors with the Košice – okolie District Court. In this claim, plaintiffs sought a judicial ruling declaring them to be the owners of a plot of agricultural land. The applicants entered the proceedings as defendants on different dates and on distinct grounds as it is outlined in the Appendix. Between 1988 and 2009 the first instance court held a number of hearings, ordered expert opinions, dealt with other relevant evidence, and heard witnesses. It also took a considerable time to determine who the actual parties were to be sued in the proceedings in view of multiple deaths among the original defendants and various transactions made in respect of the property in question. On 27 April 2010 the Constitutional Court delivered a judgement, finding that the applicants’ (or their predecessors’) right to a hearing within a reasonable time had been violated by the District Court. It ordered the District Court to proceed without undue delay and to reimburse the complainants’ legal costs. It also awarded just satisfaction in respect of non ‑ pecuniary damage of EUR 300 to the applicants listed under points 1   to   17 and EUR 500 to those listed under points 18 to 28 and to the deceased predecessor of the applicants listed under points 29 to 32 of the Appendix. It appears that the Constitutional Court took into account inter alia the procedural behaviour of the complainants and what was at stake for them. On 22 November 2011 the District Court delivered a judgment on the merits of the case. On 19 March 2013 the Constitutional Court rejected the applicants’ fresh constitutional complaint, finding no further undue delay in the proceedings before the first-instance court since the constitutional judgment of 27   April 2010. On 12 March 2014 the Košice Regional Court partly upheld the first ‑ instance judgment and partly dismissed the claim concerning some of the contested property. It also rejected the remainder of the appeal. The judgment became final on 10 July 2014. On 8 August 2014 the applicants listed under points 4, and 30 to 32 and several other defendants in the proceedings lodged an appeal on points of law. On 21 January 2015 the proceedings in respect of that appeal were discontinued without examination of its merits due to the appellants’ failure to pay the court fees. The decision became final on 13 February 2015. COMPLAINT The applicants complain under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings to which they were parties.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     In view of the Constitutional Court’s finding, may the applicants still claim to be victims of a violation of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 34 of a violation of their alleged right under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?   2.     In the light of all circumstances of the case, was the length of the proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of each applicant?   3.     The parties are requested to provide information in the format shown below concerning the exact dates of commencement and conclusion of the domestic proceedings and levels of jurisdiction involved in the proceedings in respect of each applicant.   Name of the applicant Identification details of the applicant Date of entry into the proceedings Date of conclusion of the proceedings Overall length of proceedings for the applicant and levels of jurisdiction involved on the merits           AppendiX   A B C D E F G   NAME AND SURNAME YEAR OF BIRTH ADDRESS EXACT DATE OF ENTRY INTO THE PROCEEDIGNS EXACT DATE OF CONCLUSION OF THE PROCEEDINGS (FINAL DECISION) ORIGINAL DEFENDANT or TITLE (e.g. succession) ON WHICH THE APPLICANT BECAME A PARTY TO PROCEEDINGS PROPERTY AT STAKE (m² ) JS RECEIVED FROM THE CC (in euros) 1 Ms Margita CIRNEROVÁ 1934 Vyšný Klátov č. 96 27/11/1987 10/07/2014 original party 4.31 300 2 Ms Margita TIRPÁKOVÁ 1941 Košice 21/11/1987 10/07/2014 original party 18.49 300 3 Mr Štefan MAČINGA 1939 Vyšný Klátov č. 84 21/11/1987 10/07/2014 original party 15.41 300 4 Mr Ľubomír SCERANKA 1961 Vyšný Klátov č. 48 20/10/2011 10/07/2014 successor to the original party 7.7 300 5 Mr Karol ČIŽMÁR 1942 Košice 28/09/1990 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 4.31 300 6 Mr Anton ČIŽMÁR 1940 Košice 28/09/1990 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 4.31 300 7 Ms Marta SOBINKOVIČOVÁ 1946 Nižný Klátov č. 172 02/08/2004 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 11.08 300 8 Ms Mária JURÍČKOVÁ 1925 Košice 02/08/2004   (the first instance court assessed her date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 11.08 300 9 Mr Vincent ČIŽMÁR 1933 Vyšný Klátov č. 78 02/08/2004   (the first instance court assessed his date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 11.08 300 10 Mr Viktor ČIŽMÁR 1947 Vyšný Klátov č. 5 23/12/2005 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 11.08 300 11 Ms Mária BALOGOVÁ 1941 Nižný Klátov 02/08/2004   (the first instance court assessed her date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 9.01 300 12 Ms Mária VLČEJOVÁ 1938 Košice 02/08/2004   (the first instance court assessed her date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 10.81 300 13 Mr Jozef MARČÁK 1965 Košice   03/05/2007 10/07/2014 successor to the original party   (the first instance court assessed his predecessor’s date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 9.01 300 14 Mr Matej MAČINGA 1951 Košice 04/06/1994 10/07/2014 successor to the original party 4.62 300 15 Ms Eva GALÁTOVÁ 1970 Banská Bystrica 04/06/1994 10/07/2014 successor to the original party 4.62 300 16 Ms Mária GURBAĽOVÁ 1939 Košice 02/05/2000 10/07/2014 successor to the original party 6.93 300 17 Ms Alena MAČINGOVÁ 1942 Košice 20/04/2008 10/07/2014 successor to the defendant sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings (since 02/08/2004)   (the first instance court assessed her predecessor’s date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 9.25 300 18 Mr Miloš MAČINGA 1966 Košice 23/12/2005 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 34.68 500 19 Mr Štefan MIKULA 1942 Vyšný Klátov č. 35 02/08/2004 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 44.39 500 20 Mr Pavol JOKEĽ 1950 Košice 02/08/2004   (the first instance court assessed his date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 34.68 500 21 Ms Stanislava ŠEBEŠOVÁ 1953 Prešov 20/04/2008 10/07/2014 successor to the defendant sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings (since 02/08/2004)   (the first instance court assessed her predecessor’s date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 17.57 500 22 Ms Jaroslava OĽHOVÁ 1957 Nižná Šebastová 20/04/2008 10/07/2014 successor to the defendant sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings (since 02/08/2004)   (the first instance court assessed her predecessor’s date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 500 23 Ms Eva SCIRANKOVÁ 1964 Nižný Klátov 23/09/2005 10/07/2014 successor to the defendant sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings (since 02/08/2004) 23.12 500 24 Ms Jarmila ČIŽMÁROVÁ 1971 Vyšný Klátov č. 82 02/08/2004   (the first instance court assessed her date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 44.4 500 25 Mr Milan CIRNER 1963 Vyšný Klátov č. 96 02/08/2004   (the first instance court assessed his date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 17.57 500 26 Mr Blažej CIRNER 1958 Vyšný Klátov č. 136 02/08/2004 10/07/2014 sued by the claimant in the course of the proceedings 17.57 500 27 Ms Cecília GORDANOVÁ 1949 Košice 18/05/2006   (the first instance court assessed her date of entry in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 10/07/2014 successor to the original party   (the first instance court assessed she had entered the proceedings on the title of acquiring the property share by deed of gift in 2005) 32.43 500 28 Mr Mikuláš ČIŽMÁR 1957 Vyšný Klátov č. 49 18/05/2006 10/07/2014 successor to the original party   (the first instance court assessed the date of entry of his predecessor in the proceedings on 23/12/2005) 32.43 500 29 Mr Ondrej JUSKO 1946 Vyšný Klátov č. 97 04/11/2011 10/07/2014 successor to the original party 261.31 500 30 Ms Valéria HALUŠKOVÁ 1973 Hyľov č. 178 04/11/2011 10/07/2014 successor to the original party 31 Mr Rastislav JUSKO 1976 Košice 04/11/2011 10/07/2014 successor to the original party 32 Mr Jaroslav JUSKO 1. 1971 Vyšný Klátov č. 178 04/11/2011 10/07/2014 successor to the original party     The applicant listed under point 4 is an heir of the deceased original applicant, Mr Ján Sceranka, who was born 1936 and lived in Vyšný Klátov. The applicants listed under points 29, 30, 31 and 32 are heirs of the deceased original applicant, Ms Mária Jusková, who was born in 1952 and lived in Vyšný Klátov.