CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 mars 2019
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-192724
- Date
- 25 mars 2019
- Publication
- 25 mars 2019
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleCommunicated
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.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 25 March 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 72164/14 Dumitru COVALENCO against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 28 October 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a civil dispute between the applicant and an insurance company concerning a motor vehicle accident and the refusal of the insurance company to pay the insurance premium. The applicant was successful at first and second instance courts. However, the Supreme Court reversed those judgments in proceedings which were not public and without giving the applicant a possibility to be heard in person. The applicant complains under Article 6 and 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that the proceedings were not fair and that he had lost property on that account. He also complains under Article 13 of the Convention that he had no remedy under domestic law against the breach of his rights by the Supreme Court of Justice. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention ( Godorozea v. Moldova , no. 17023/05, § 32, 6 October 2009)?   2.     Has there been a breach of the applicant’s right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No.   1?   3.     The Government are requested to submit a full copy of the case-file in the domestic proceedings.Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 25 mars 2019
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-192724
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel