CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 7 avril 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } Published on 26 April 2021   SECOND SECTION Application no. 21039/11 Zinovia DOAGA and Olga DOAGA against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 24 March 2011 communicated on 7 April 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants are the wife and daughter of D. They inherited a plot of land from D., but two other persons claimed that the land had been exchanged for another piece of land by D. years ago. The applicants eventually lost. They complain that the domestic courts examined a court action lodged by the other party in the domestic proceedings after the expiry of the limitation period and that they examined a late appeal, in breach of the principle of legal certainty and without giving any reasons. The applicants complain of a breach of Article 6 § 1 and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of Article 6 § 1 as a result of the examination of a court action against the applicants lodged after the expiry of the limitation period, as well as of examining a late appeal? (see Baroul   Partner-A v. Moldova , no. 39815/07 , §§ 34-42, 16 July 2009 and Ghirea v.   Moldova , no. 15778/05, §§ 30-36, 26 June 2012)   2.     Has there been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? Was the interference with the applicants’ property right lawful, notably in the light of examining a court action lodged outside the limitation period and a late appeal? ( Baroul Partner-A , cited above, §§ 43-52)