CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 14 novembre 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 } .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 } .s8578A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:11.6pt } .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 }   Communicated on 14 November 2016   FIRST SECTION Application no. 52351/14 Živko VASILEVSKI against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia lodged on 17 July 2014 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Živko Vasilevski, is a Macedonian national who was born in 1958 and lives in Štip. He is represented before the Court by Mr   M.   Marolov, a lawyer practising in Štip. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. The applicant lived in Štip. He was a police officer employed by the Ministry of the Interior and was assigned to patrolling official Ministry buildings. On 10 October 2007 he was reassigned and moved to the northern regional centre of the State Border Police. He was reassigned again on 1 July 2009 and began to work at the Aerodrom police station in Skopje. On 30 March 2012 he brought a claim to the Skopje Court of First Instance against the Ministry of the Interior for unpaid transport allowances. He submitted that he had not been paid transport allowances for part of the period he had worked in the State Border Police and for the period of his assignment to Skopje. On 30 May 2012 the Ministry responded to the claim, requesting that it be dismissed it as unfounded. On 26 June 2013 the Ministry made an additional submission to the Court of First Instance adducing additional evidence aiming at establishing that the applicant resided in Skopje and therefore could not claim a transport allowance. Neither the submission nor the documentary evidence it contained was communicated to the applicant. At a hearing on 9 October 2013, after learning that the Ministry had made an additional submission, the applicant applied to have the evidence obtained by it excluded from the proceedings. His application was dismissed. On 17 October 2013, taking into account the evidence that had been adduced, including that provided by the Ministry on 26 June 2013, the Skopje Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant’s civil claim as unfounded. The applicant lodged an appeal on 31 October 2013, complaining, inter alia , that the evidence submitted by the Ministry had not been communicated to him. On 26 March 2014 the Skopje Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal, without providing any reasoning regarding that particular complaint. COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention of a lack of fairness in the civil proceedings in that the evidence submitted by the Ministry of the Interior had not been communicated to him. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was the principle of adversarial proceedings respected in the proceedings before the Skopje Court of First Instance?