CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 15 mai 2017

.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 } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt }   Communicated on 15 May 2017   FIRST SECTION Application no. 35375/15 Marino ZELIĆ against Croatia lodged on 16 July 2015 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Marino Zelić, is a Croatian national who was born in 1987 and lives in Zadar. He is represented before the Court by Mr I. Stanić, a lawyer practising in Zadar. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 16 November 2010 the Zadar police lodged an indictment against the applicant with the Zadar Minor Offences Court, alleging that he had committed a minor offence by verbally and physically attacking S.K., a member of his family. The applicant denied the charges against him. During the proceedings S.K. and Z.M., witnesses for the prosecution, gave their evidence before the trial court in the absence of the defence. The applicant was found guilty as charged and fined 1,200 Croatian kunas (HRK). COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention that he was not able to examine witnesses against him. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the applicant able to examine witnesses against him, as required by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention?