CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 mars 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s7C2088F3 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#000000 } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s88830249 { width:100%; margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s1601B0A7 { height:14.95pt } .sF1780228 { width:8.5%; 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 } .s8A6FC03 { width:27.54%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD35B384B { width:21.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sC2975403 { width:21.2%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD8C0DB99 { width:20.98%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s85E24CD6 { height:10pt } .sD80C7CA5 { width:8.5%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s3B1F0420 { width:27.54%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s46019CD7 { width:21.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s915B2731 { width:21.2%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s3671B59B { width:20.98%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5111C6A0 { height:9.8pt } .s87F54B93 { height:5.1pt } .s721E78A { height:10.2pt } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 15 April 2024   THIRD SECTION Application no. 32645/16 Hajro ÇINI and Others against Albania lodged on 6 July 2016 communicated on 27 March 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the failure of the authorities to enforce two administrative decisions, which recognised the applicants’ common ancestor H. Ç. ownership title over two plots of land and their right to restitution of the plots. On 25 and 27 June 2008 the Vlora regional Agency for Restitution and Compensation of Property (the Property Agency) recognised the applicants’ joint inherited rights over two plots of land in Saranda and ordered their restitution. On 9 and 29 March 2012 the Saranda District Court issued the respective enforcement orders. On 16 April 2012 the applicants submitted the case to a bailiff’s office to obtain the enforcement orders’ registration. On 18   April 2012 the bailiff’s office initiated the enforcement proceedings and requested the Saranda Regional Land Register to register the applicants’ ownership title on the plots of land. The Saranda Regional Land Register has repeatedly refused to register the applicants’ ownership titles referring to the difficulties in identifying the locations and boundaries of the plots of land due to their insufficiently clear description in the Property Agency’s decisions. On 26 February 2016 a restriction order was issued concerning the land plots in question by the Task Force of the Prime Minister’s Office. Based on the latest update provided by the applicants, the Regional Land Register informed them in November 2016, that it was still awaiting instructions from its central office about the registration of their properties. To date, it would appear that the ownership title registration proceedings are still pending before the Land Register. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention the applicants complain that there has been a breach of their property rights as a result of the non-enforcement of the 2008 Property Agency decisions. They further complain about the length of the enforcement proceedings. Under Article 13 of the Convention, they claim that they don’t have an effective remedy to address the non-enforcement of their property titles. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Is the length of the proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention ( see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII)? 2.     In view of the failure of the Land Register to proceed with the registration of the applicants’ ownership title and the restriction order of 26   February 2016: (a) Has there been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Burdov v.   Russia (no. 2) , no. 33509/04, § 66, ECHR 2009, and Sharxhi and others v.   Albania, no.10613/16, § 92, 11 January 2018)? In particular, have the applicants been adequately informed about the reasons for the non-registration, and the status of the plots of land in question? (b) Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to property under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (see Fuklev v. Ukraine , no.   71186/01, §§ 90-91, 7 June 2005, and Bushati and Others v.   Albania , no.   6397/04, §§ 92-94, 8 December 2009)? Have the applicants obtained, or taken any steps to obtain, possession of the plots of land in question? 3. Have the applicants at their disposal an effective domestic remedy as required by Article 13   of the Convention, that would allow adequate and sufficient redress for prolonged non-enforcement of the Property Agency’s decisions (see Gjyli v.   Albania, no.   32907/07 , §§ 53-54, 29 September 2009, Mishgjoni v.   Albania,   no.   18381/05 , §§   68-73, 7 December 2010, and Luli and Others v. Albania , nos.   64480/09   and 5 others, § 79, 1   April 2014)? In particular, were the applicants required to lodge an action under Article 399/1 et seqq . of the Code of Civil Procedure? The parties are invited to provide copies of all the relevant documents.   APPENDIX Application no. 32645/16 No. Applicant’s name Year of birth Nationality Place of residence 1. Hajro ÇINI 1957 Albanian, Canadian RICHMOND HILL 2. Golja AGRON 1943 Albanian, Canadian Ontario 3. Xhiku EDMOND 1956 Albanian Athens 4. Pici ENKELEJDA 1964 Albanian, USA Ridgewood 5. Shehu FATMIR 1975 Albanian, German Gladbeck 6. Feraizi FEIZI 1938 Albanian Tirana 7. Shehu FITNET 1956 Albanian Durrës 8. Tivari GËZIM 1968 Albanian Durrës 9. Feraizi GJINOVEFA 1968 Albanian, Greek Tirana 10. Demiri ILIR 1961 Albanian, USA Glendale 11. Kalaja LILIANA 1959 Albanian, Italian Trieste 12. Begeja LIRI 1944 Albanian Durrës 13. Shehu MERCEDE 1960 Albanian, Italian Torino 14. Etemi MERITA 1972 Albanian Tiranë 15. Çini MESHAN 1928 Albanian, Canadian Ontario 16. Gjika MIMOZA 1960 Albanian, USA Garfield 17. Shehu MUHARREM 1938 Albanian Durrës 18. Shehu NEXHIP 1951 Albanian Durrës 19. Shehu SHPËTIM 1944 Albanian Durrës 20. Isufaj (Çini) SUZANA 1962 Albanian Durrës 21. Tivari TAULANT 1970 Albanian, British Durrës 22. Hoxha VIRON 1956 Albanian, USA Garfield 23. Braham ZAHIDE 1966 Albanian, Australian Victoria 24. Beqiri ZHANETA 1955 Albanian Tirana