CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 mars 2019

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 19 March 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 24911/14 Î.P. VALEA SALCÎMILOR against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 24 March 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the dismissal of the applicant’s appeal on points of law by the Supreme Court of Justice as time-barred in circumstances in which it had allegedly been lodged within the time-limit provided for by the Code of Civil Procedure. The applicant alleges that the Supreme Court failed to apply the provisions of the Code according to which, if the last day of the time-limit is on a weekend or a public holiday, the last day is considered to be the first working day which follows. The applicant complains under Articles 6, 13 and 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the fact that the dismissal of his appeal on points of law was contrary to the law. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of its civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention (see Zubac v. Croatia [GC], no. 40160/12, § 95, 5 April 2018)?