CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 janvier 2018

.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 }   Communicated on 17 January 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 72783/11 THEO NATIONAL CONSTRUCT S.R.L. against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 19 November 2011 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant is a limited liability company incorporated in Romania. It invested over one million euros in a limited liability company in Moldova. As a result of civil proceedings initiated by its Moldovan partner, the applicant company lost its investment in favour of the latter. According to the applicant company, the manner in which the domestic courts examined the case disclosed a breach of its rights guaranteed by Article 1 of Protocol   No. 1 to the Convention, if only for the reason that the courts failed to apply the statute of limitations. The applicant company alleges that there has been a breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a breach of the applicant company’s right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention?