CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 14 juin 2011

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s72EB7DC5 { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7EE1C8F0 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sC702907E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s4070A5A6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:24pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid }       FOURTH SECTION Application no. 27901/07 by Vasil LAZELLARI against Albania lodged on 12 June 2007   STATEMENT OF FACTS THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Vasil Lazellari, is an Albanian national who was born in 1960 and lives in Pogradec. He is represented before the Court by Mr   L.   Nole, a lawyer practising in Tirana. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. 1.     Proceedings concerning the demolition of the applicant’s building On 18 June 1999 the Pogradec Council for Territorial Planning (“CTP”) granted the applicant a building permit to erect a two-storey building, consisting of a ground floor and a first floor, to be used as a café-bar. On 14 September 1999 an inspection report ( process-verbal kolaudimi ) was drawn up certifying the completion of the construction. A three-storey building had been constructed instead of the two-storey one as stipulated in the building permit. The overall cost was marked as ALL 3,500,000 (three million five hundred thousand Albanian leks). On 20 March 2000 the applicant registered the building with the Office for the Registration of Immovable Property (“ORIP”). The ORIP issued a certificate of registration in respect of the three-storey building. On 20 December 2003 the Pogradec Municipality (“the Municipality”), considering the building unlawful, ordered its demolition. At the same time, the Municipality reported the commission of the offence of falsification of documents to the prosecutor’s office (see “criminal proceedings” below). On 17 February 2004 the Construction Police asked the applicant to voluntarily demolish the building. On 21 February 2004, in the absence of voluntary compliance by the applicant, the Construction Police demolished the building. On an unspecified date the applicant challenged the demolition order. He also sought the payment of pecuniary damage in the amount of ALL   3,500,000. On 13 June 2005 the Korça District Court dismissed the applicant’s action. It reasoned that the building permit should not have been granted, the applicant not being the owner of the plot of land upon which the building was constructed. It further found that, in view of discrepancies between the figures in different documents, including in the application for construction, the application for a building permit and the inspection report, there had been a fictitious presentation of information. The court also relied on the minutes of the CTP meeting of 18 June 1999, according to which no decision had been taken in favour of the applicant’s application for a building permit. On an unspecified date the applicant appealed. On 20 December 2005 the Korça Court of Appeal upheld the District Court’s decision. The applicant appealed. On 23 March 2007 the Supreme Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal. 2.     Criminal proceedings against the applicant and third parties Following the report of the crime by the Municipality on 20 December 2003, the prosecutor brought charges of falsification of documents against the applicant and two other persons, B and L, who were the people responsible for having signed the building permit. On 4 September 2004 the prosecutor dropped the charge against the applicant and decided to discontinue the case ( pushimin e çështjes ). By final decision of 16 June 2006 the Korça Court of Appeal decided to discontinue the case against B and L. The court relied on the prosecutor’s request to discontinue the proceedings, whose relevant parts read: “On the basis of the verified documents, there exist discrepancies in figures and there are irregularities in drawing up the documents. However, a building permit was granted. Whether that was in breach of the law, it is incumbent on the responsible authority to assess this fact. As a result, B signed the building permit after it was granted. There is no criminal element in his action. L was not responsible for the drawing up of application and he cannot be held criminally liable.” B.     Relevant domestic law The relevant domestic law has been described in Jakupi v. Albania (dec.), no. 11186/03, 1 December 2009 and Mullai and Others v. Albania , no. 9074/07, §§ 57-64, 23 March 2010. COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that there has been a breach of his right of property. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a disproportionate interference with the applicant’s peaceful enjoyment of possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1? In particular, did that interference impose an excessive individual burden on the applicant (see Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy, [GC], no.   22774/93, § 59, ECHR 1999-V)?