CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 20 mars 2023

.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 11 April 2023   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 17462/20 Maria BUZGURE and Nicu BUZGURE against Romania lodged on 15 April 2020 communicated on 20 March 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns civil proceedings instituted against the applicants in connection with their property rights over a land and the demolition of their house built on that land. By a decision of the Craiova Court of Appeal of 3 November 2016, considered final according to the legal provisions in force at that time, the action against the applicants was allowed. The applicants’ appeal on points of law filed with the High Court of Cassation and Justice and Justice was rejected as inadmissible on the ground that the value of the applicants’ claims was less than one million Romanian lei (the equivalent of approximately 250,000 euros). Before dismissing the appeal on points of law, the High Court of Cassation and Justice allowed the applicants’ request to refer to the Constitutional Court a plea of unconstitutionality of the legal provisions prohibiting the appeal on points of law for the kind of cases similar to their case. Following a decision of the Constitutional Court of 18 December 2018, which declared unconstitutional the legal provisions prohibiting the appeal on points of law in cases where the value of the claims was less than one million lei, the applicants lodged an application for judicial review ( revizuire ), based on Article 509 (1) 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. By a decision of the High Court of Cassation and Justice of 17 September 2019 (served on the applicants on 17 December 2019), the applicants’ application for judicial review was rejected as inadmissible, on the ground that the decision of the Constitutional Court was not applicable to their case. Relying on Articles 6 §   1 and 13 of the Convention, the applicants complain of the unfairness of the civil proceedings and of a lack of an effective remedy, alleging that the rejection of their application for judicial review was grossly arbitrary, as according to the constant case-law of the Constitutional Court the effects of its decisions on declaring the unconstitutionality of legal provisions apply to the cases where a plea of unconstitutionality was raised, with retrospective effect. The applicants also submit that the way in which the High Court of Cassation and Justice interpreted and applied to their case the legal provisions of Article 509 (1) 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whose aim is expressly that of reviewing final decisions based on legal provisions which were found to be unconstitutional, deprived them of a legal remedy. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was Article   6 §   1 of the Convention under its civil head applicable to the proceedings for judicial review ( revizuire ) before the High Court of Cassation and Justice?   2.     If so, did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of their civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was the decision rendered by the High Court of Cassation and Justice on 17 September 2019 leading to the non-examination of the applicants’ appeal on points of law grossly arbitrary and for that reason contrary to Article 6 § 1 (see Bochan v. Ukraine (no. 2) [GC], no. 22251/08, §§60-65, ECHR 2015)?