CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 novembre 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 24 November 2025   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 25631/24 Vladimer CHITAIA against Georgia lodged on 23 August 2024 communicated on 4 November 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the length of the administrative-legal proceedings initiated by the applicant on 7 March 2017 regarding his registration as homeless and the provision of shelter in Tbilisi. After seven years of examination at three levels of jurisdiction, the case was remitted back to the relevant administrative authorities. It appears that no final decision has been taken to date. The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of the proceedings. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Is Article 6 § 1 of the Convention under its civil head applicable to the proceedings in the present case (see Fazia Ali v. the United Kingdom , no.   40378/10, §§ 53-55, 20 October 2015, and Đurić v. Serbia , no. 24989/17, §§ 51-55, 6 February 2024)?   2.     Has the length of the administrative proceedings in the present case been in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, for instance, Kharitonashvili v. Georgia , no. 41957/04, §   39, 10   February 2009)?