CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 juillet 2019
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-194912
- Date
- 4 juillet 2019
- Publication
- 4 juillet 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 } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .sEA321EE2 { border-top:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-right:0.75pt solid #f8f8f8; border-left:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#5f5f5f } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s3FAB130A { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#f8f8f8 } .sE8D23146 { border-top:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-right:0.75pt solid #f8f8f8; border-left:0.75pt solid #f8f8f8; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#5f5f5f } .s69AE3175 { border-top:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-right:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; border-left:0.75pt solid #f8f8f8; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#5f5f5f } .sAE011EF4 { border:0.75pt solid #5f5f5f; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sEA7BCE7D { border:0.75pt solid #0072bc; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e8e8e8 } Communicated on 4 July 2019   FIRST SECTION Application no. 43344/18 Tanja DEDEJSKA and others against North Macedonia and 7 other applications (see list appended) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern the applicants’ dismissal from their posts (to which they were appointed by Parliament) as members of two second-instance Commissions for deciding complaints in administrative proceedings, before their five-year term has expired. On 19 March and 23   July 2018 Parliament, acting on proposal from the Government, dismissed the applicants from their posts. The decisions were published in the Official Gazette on 20 March and 24 July 2018. The applicants complain under Articles 6 § 1 of the Convention that they did not have access to a court in order to challenge their dismissal. They also complain under Article 13 of the Convention about lack of an effective domestic remedy for their Convention complaints. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Is Article 6 § 1 of the Convention applicable to the dispute concerning the applicants’ dismissal from their posts (see, for general principles, Vilho Eskelinen and Others v. Finland [GC], no. 63235/00, § 62, ECHR 2007 ‑ II)?   2.     If so, were the applicants afforded access to a court to challenge that dismissal? If not, was the restriction of the applicants’ access to court compatible with the requirements of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?   3.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their Article 6 § 1 complaint, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?   APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Date of Birth Place of Residence Nationality 1 43344/18 Dedejska and Others v. North Macedonia 05/09/2018 Tanja DEDEJSKA 12/12/1969 Strumica North Macedonia   Zorica STOILEVA 03/09/1986 Sveti Nikole North Macedonia   Aleksandar SOFRONIJOSKI 28/05/1984 Bitola North Macedonia   Vladimir PETROVSKI 14/01/1988 Skopje North Macedonia   Hajrula MISINI 10/08/1966 Kumanovo North Macedonia 2 2299/19 Ivanovska v. North Macedonia 31/12/2018 Jagotka IVANOVSKA 18/06/1966 Sveti Nikole North Macedonia 3 5920/19 Filipovska-Pavleska v. North Macedonia 22/01/2019 Snezhana FILIPOVSKA-PAVLESKA 25/04/1974 Skopje North Macedonia 4 5948/19 Razmoski v. North Macedonia 22/01/2019 Borche RAZMOSKI 22/08/1983 Skopje North Macedonia 5 5960/19 Sajkoski v. North Macedonia 22/01/2019 Vlatko SAJKOSKI 09/05/1976 Kichevo North Macedonia 6 5969/19 Donevski v. North Macedonia 22/01/2019 Darko DONEVSKI 18/12/1979 Skopje North Macedonia 7 5972/19 Musharevski v. North Macedonia 22/01/2019 Ilche MUSHAREVSKI 26/07/1986 Resen North Macedonia 8 7159/19 Todorovska v. North Macedonia 22/01/2019 Blagica TODOROVSKA 01/09/1967 Sveti Nikole North Macedonia  Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 4 juillet 2019
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-194912
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel