CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 janvier 2023
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-222959
- Date
- 10 janvier 2023
- Publication
- 10 janvier 2023
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 } .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 } .s96D82958 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sD00444C6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt } .s7B5C9AFD { width:79.02%; border-collapse:collapse } .s23692999 { width:9.82%; 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 } .sE6B15E7F { width:24.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF4DEC127 { width:17.2%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sB9353DF1 { width:24.4%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s88ABD027 { width:24.42%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s9C4A810B { width:9.82%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s50176368 { width:24.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s29A57CA7 { width:17.2%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s86E1EC23 { width:24.4%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s91B8069D { width:24.42%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Published on 30 January 2023   SECOND SECTION Application no. 25866/21 Sonja PICIG and Others against Croatia lodged on 12 May 2021 communicated on 10 January 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants’ family member was shot and killed in 1999 by T.B., a Croatian army soldier who was off duty. The killing was perpetrated with a rifle which T.B. had picked up at a battlefield during his participation in the war in Croatia, which ended in 1995. The applicants complain, in particular, that the State failed to comply with its positive obligation under Article 2 of the Convention as it failed to take any measures in order to prevent unlawful possession of firearms which its soldiers had acquired during the war. In the civil proceedings for damages against the State, the domestic courts held that, even assuming that Croatian army soldiers had been required to surrender to their military units any weapon which they had acquired during the war, the causal link between the failure of the State to supervise compliance with that requirement and the killing of the applicants’ relative in 1999 was too remote to engage the State’s liability for his killing. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Did the killing of the applicants’ relative engage the responsibility of the State under Article 2 of the Convention? If so, was there a breach of the said provision (see, mutatis mutandis , Kotilainen and Others v. Finland , no.   62439/12, §§ 66-68 and 84-90, 17 September 2020; Gerasimenko and   Others v. Russia , nos. 5821/10 and 65523/12, §§ 91 et seq. , 1 December 2016; Sašo Gorgiev v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia , no.   49382/06, §§ 39-55, ECHR 2012 (extracts); and Gorovenky and Bugara v. Ukraine , nos.   36146/05 and 42418/05, §§ 31-40, 12 January 2012)? The Government are requested to submit information whether and which measures were taken by the domestic authorities during and after the war with the purpose of preventing unlawful possession of firearms and other weapons by its soldiers, including the weapons picked up at a battlefield with or without their superiors’ knowledge. APPENDIX List of applicants: Application no. 25866/21 No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality Place of residence 1. Sonja PICIG 1967 Croatian Virovitica 2. Sanja JOVETIĆ 1999 Croatian Virovitica 3. Liljana ŠUPRNA 1989 Croatian Virovitica    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 10 janvier 2023
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-222959
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel