CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 décembre 2024
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-239146
- Date
- 19 décembre 2024
- Publication
- 19 décembre 2024
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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s4DB80EE1 { width:10.24%; 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 } .s8EC922A2 { width:30.94%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sC60E5610 { width:13.24%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF15D7952 { width:24.48%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDE0DCC1C { width:21.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s6A11E46B { width:10.24%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s31D4DBD1 { width:30.94%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s3BFE44DE { width:13.24%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sFAF5B83E { width:24.48%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4248193D { width:21.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } Published on 6 January 2025   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 27237/24 Aleksandra IVANKOVIĆ and Others against Bosnia and Herzegovina lodged on 14 September 2024 communicated on 19 December 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the length of court proceedings in connection with the non-enforcement of the judgment of 25   March 2013 in the applicants’ favour against a private party. It raises issues under Articles   6 and   13 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No. 1. On 17   February 2021 the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina acknowledged a violation of the applicants’ rights set out in Article   6   §   1 of the Convention (the court considered that there was no need to examine the complaint under Article   1 of Protocol No.   1) and awarded KM   500 to each of the applicants. It appears that the proceedings instituted by the applicants concerning the determination of the judgment debt are pending before the domestic court at the first level of jurisdiction and that the judgment of 25   March 2013 remains unenforced to date. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the respondent State complied with its positive obligation to organise an effective system for enforcement of judgments, as required by Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (see, notably, Fuklev v. Ukraine , no. 71186/01, 7 June 2005)? 2.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaints under Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?     APPENDIX Application no. 27237/24   No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality Place of residence 1. Aleksandra IVANKOVIĆ 1975 Belgian Genval 2. Milica TAMAMOVIĆ 2002 Belgian Genval 3. Tadej TAMAMOVIĆ 2004 Belgian Genval        Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 19 décembre 2024
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-239146
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel