CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 5 juillet 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 } .s2A91C753 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { 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 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF9C0A319 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 26 July 2021   THIRD SECTION Application no. 52551/18 Pavlos KRASHIAS and Others against Cyprus and 5 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 5 July 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern the length of criminal proceedings.   Application no. 52551/18: On 27 April 2011 the applicants, a company and its directors, were criminally prosecuted (no. 9649/2011) for their refusal to pay a duty imposed by the customs department. On 6 October 2015 the Larnaca District Court found the applicants guilty of the offence and on 2 December 2015 it imposed on them a fine and ordered them in addition to pay the duty. On 14 December 2015 and 16 December 2015, the applicants and the Attorney General, respectively, appealed. On 30 April 2018 the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention the applicants complain about the length of the criminal proceedings.   Application no. 25900/19: On 16 September 2016 the Larnaca Assize Court found the applicant guilty of, inter alia , rape and sentenced him to thirteen years’ imprisonment. On 27 October 2016 the applicant appealed. At the time of application to the Court the Supreme Court had not yet issued a decision. Relying on Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention the applicant complains about the length of the criminal appeal proceedings and the absence of an effective domestic remedy in this connection.   Applications nos. 63031/19 and 63042/19: The applicants are a company and its director. On 29 November 2013 they were charged for, inter alia, being in possession of certain buildings without having obtained the municipality’s final approval. On 31 January 2018 the Paphos District Court acquitted the applicants of all charges. On 13 February 2018 the District Officer appealed (no. 153/18) and on 27 March 2019 the Supreme Court set aside the first instance decision. On 31   May   2019 the Supreme Court imposed a fine on the applicants and issued an order for the demolition of the buildings Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicants complain about the length of the criminal proceedings.   Application no. 3351/20: On 27 August 2014 the applicant was indicted for, inter alia , forgery and producing false documents. The applicant pleaded guilty admitting the charges. Between 28 August 2014 and 9   March 2015, the applicant was detained. On 14 March 2019 the applicant was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment. Invoking Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, he complains about the length of the criminal proceedings.   Application no. 16783/20: On 2 March 2015 the applicant was indicted for failure to pay instalments under a court order (case no. 1312/15). On 23   September 2019 the Attorney General agreed to the prosecution’s request to enter a nolle prosequi . As a result, on 2 October 2019 proceedings were discontinued. Relying on Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention, the applicant complains about the length of the criminal proceedings and the absence of an effective domestic remedy in this connection. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES General question:   Was the length of the criminal proceedings in the present cases in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? (see, mutatis mutandis, Georgiadis v. Cyprus , no. 50516/99, 14 May 2002)   Question specific to applications nos. 25900/19 and 16783/20:   Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaint under Article 6 § 1, as required by Article   13 of the Convention? (see, mutatis mutandis, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §   146-60, ECHR 2000 ‑ XI)     APPENDIX   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 52551/18 Krashias and others v.   Cyprus 26/10/2018 Pavlos KRASHIAS 1933 Nicosia Cypriot Michael KRASHIAS 1939 Nicosia Cypriot Charalambos KRASHIAS 1944 Nicosia Cypriot KRASHIAS FOOTWEAR INDUSTRY 1977 Nicosia Cypriot Andreas ANGELIDES 2. 25900/19 Mazid v.   Cyprus 25/04/2019 Mohamed MAZID 1979 Nicosia Egyptian   3. 63031/19 Tremetoushiotis Developers Ltd v. Cyprus 28/11/2019 TREMETOUSHIOTIS DEVELOPERS LTD 2002 Pafos Cypriot Savvas ZANNOUPAS 4. 63042/19 Tremetousiotis v. Cyprus 28/11/2019 Tasos TREMETOUSIOTIS 1962 Tala Cypriot Savvas ZANNOUPAS 5. 3351/20 Halmai v.   Cyprus 01/01/2020 George Cristian HALMAI 1966 Kissonerga Romanian   6. 16783/20 Irodotou v.   Cyprus 23/03/2020 Marios IRODOTOU 1964 Pafos Cypriot Konstantinos MANOLIS