CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 mai 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 12 May 2018   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 53515/15 HERMES HITEL ÉS FAKTOR ZRT against Hungary lodged on 22 October 2015 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant company’s inability to have certain adjudicated claims executed which it held against the Hungarian State. This state of affairs was caused by an intervening amendment to the Forest Act which rendered unalienable the property which had served as security for the claim. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been an interference with the applicant company’s peaceful enjoyment of possessions, within the meaning of Article   1 of Protocol   No.   1? If so, was that interference necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest?