CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 janvier 2024

.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 } Published on 5 February 2024   FIFTH SECTION Applications nos. 977/23 and 980/23 Teimuraz BIGVAVA against Georgia and Tamari BIGVAVA against Georgia lodged on 19 December 2022 and 22 December 2022 respectively communicated on 17 January 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applications concern non-enforcement of a final judgment issued against a municipal agency. The judgment established that the agency in question had unlawfully used the land owned by the applicants for road construction. The agency was ordered to restore the land to its original state. The judgment became final on 26   June 2020. A writ of enforcement was issued on 11   March 2021. The applicants relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and/or Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the applicants’ continued inability to have enforced the final, binding judgment in their favour?