CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 mai 2021
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-210276
- Date
- 6 mai 2021
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
IAFaits
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 } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s791A8D2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:16pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD9F3730A { width:133.2%; border-collapse:collapse } .sE0C930B5 { width:7.04%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s19D1D574 { width:36.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s967C2AB0 { width:9.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDC267C70 { width:28.06%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s4F1AA88F { width:18.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sAB93C973 { width:7.04%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s448D3EE0 { width:36.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s659EAE36 { width:9.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sEBEB1373 { width:28.06%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7792C3D1 { width:18.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify }   Published on 25 May 2021   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 8701/21 Emil PINKAS and Others against Bosnia and Herzegovina lodged on 17 December 2020 communicated on 6 May 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE In 2013 the Constitutional Court declared the State-Level Judicial and Prosecutorial Institutions Salaries Act 2005 unconstitutional in so far as it did not provide for certain work-related benefits. The applicants were at the relevant time, and some of them still are, judicial clerks at the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Following their civil action, the applicants got the impugned benefits for the period after the Constitutional Court’s decision of 2013. On 20 May 2020 the Constitutional Court upheld the decision of the civil courts in their case, finding that its decision of 2013 mentioned above had not had retroactive effect. The applicants complain under various articles about the outcome of their case, because the same civil courts have granted the impugned benefits to the judges of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina also for the period before the Constitutional Court’s decision of 2013.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Were the decisions rendered in this case arbitrary and for that reason contrary to Article 6 § 1 (see, for example, Bochan v. Ukraine (no. 2) [GC], no. 22251/08, §§ 60-65, ECHR 2015)?   2. If so, has there also been a violation of Article 14 of the Convention, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 or Article 1 of Protocol No. 12?   The Government are requested to inform the Court whether the State lodged a constitutional appeal against the decision to which the applicants refer, granting the impugned benefits to the judges of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina also for the period before the Constitutional Court’s decision of 2013. APPENDIX No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality Place of residence 1. Emil PINKAS 1984 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 2. Dženita AGIĆ 1976 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 3. Sanela AVDIBEGOVIĆ 1969 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 4. Lamija AVDIĆ 1983 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 5. Bojan AVRAMOVIĆ 1976 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 6. Selma BEGIĆ 1976 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 7. Gordana BOŽIĆ 1953 Bosnia and Herzegovina Banja Luka 8. Feđa BULJEVIĆ 1980 Bosnia and Herzegovina Mostar 9. Belma ČANO SEJFOVIĆ 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 10. Davor CILENŠEK 1983 Bosnia and Herzegovina Kiseljak 11. Elma ČORBADŽIĆ 1981 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 12. Muhamed ČUČAK 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 13. Tanja CUROVIĆ 1979 Bosnia and Herzegovina Istočno Sarajevo 14. Ana CVJETANOVIĆ 1984 Bosnia and Herzegovina Pale 15. Dženana DELJKIĆ BLAGOJEVIĆ 1977 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 16. Igor DUBAK 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 17. Lejla DŽAFERBEGOVIĆ 1979 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 18. Medina DŽERAHOVIĆ 1981 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 19. Amir DŽONLIĆ 1959 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 20. Zlata EKERT 1954 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 21. Šaćir HADŽIĆ 1960 Bosnia and Herzegovina Bugojno 22. Manuela HODŽIĆ 1977 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 23. Erna HODŽIĆ ČUČAK 1985 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 24. Amra HODŽIĆ ZEĆO 1977 Bosnia and Herzegovina Vogošća 25. Sabina HOTA ĆATOVIĆ 1981 Bosnia and Herzegovina Ilidža 26. Krunoslav JELIĆ 1954 Bosnia and Herzegovina + Croatia Sarajevo 27. Vahida JEVTIĆ 1962 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 28. Maja KAPETANOVIĆ 1981 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 29. Mirela KAROVIĆ 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 30. Snježana KOMADAN 1972 Bosnia and Herzegovina Pale 31. Zijada KONJHODŽIĆ 1970 Bosnia and Herzegovina + Norway Sarajevo 32. Lejla KURTANOVIĆ 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 33. Srđan MARKOVIĆ 1985 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 34. Bojan MESIĆ 1983 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 35. Amila MILANOV 1977 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 36. Melika MURTEZIĆ 1980 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 37. Danijela NOVAK 1974 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 38. Ivana PETKOVIĆ 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina Istočno Sarajevo 39. Amir PJANO 1973 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 40. Denis PODŽIĆ 1981 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 41. Milica PRANJIĆ 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina Konjic 42. Dženan PUŠINA 1972 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 43. Stanislava RADIVOJEVIĆ 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina + Croatia Sarajevo 44. Sanida RAMIĆ-VAHIDA 1982 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 45. Nermina ŠAKOVIĆ 1967 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 46. Anida SARAČEVIĆ 1985 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 47. Amela SMAILAGIĆ ČAMDŽIĆ 1981 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 48. Berina SMAJIĆ 1971 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 49. Neira TATLIĆ 1981 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 50. Mirela ZUKA 1977 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo 51. Dražen ZUPANC 1975 Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 6 mai 2021
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-210276
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel