CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 avril 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 13 April 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 58982/12 HEROSS LTD against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 31 August 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the quashing by way of allegedly abusive revision proceedings of a final judgment in favour of the applicant company more than ten years after it became final. The applicant company complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the quashing was in breach of the principle of legal certainty. It also alleges a breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Was the quashing of the judgment of 27 December 2000 of the Chișinău Commercial Court contrary to Article   6 §   1 of the Convention and in breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention?