CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 26 janvier 2005

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s69BE285C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt } .s9A223E1B { width:11.03pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sA8C2B9B0 { width:20.37pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s9F8EB0C0 { width:18.63pt; display:inline-block } .s9E97F54A { width:85.05pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   031 26.01.2005   Press release issued by the Registrar   GRAND CHAMBER HEARING JAHN AND OTHERS v. GERMANY   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Grand Chamber hearing today Wednesday 26 January 2005 at 9.00 a.m., in the case of Jahn and others v. Germany (application nos. 46720/99, 72203/01, 72552/01).   The applicants   The five applicants are all German nationals living in Germany: Heidi Jahn and Albert Thurm, who are sister and brother, were born in 1947 and live in Sangerhausen; Erika Rissmann and Ilse Höller, who are sisters, were born in 1942 and 1944 and live in Erfstadt and Stotzheim respectively; and, Edith Loth, who was born in 1940 and lives in Frankfurt an der Oder.   Summary of the facts   The applicants all inherited plots of land which had been allocated to their families - subject to certain restrictions regarding the transfer of title to the land - following the 1945 agrarian reform ( Bodenreformgrundstücke ) in the Soviet Occupied Zone of Germany. Such landowners were known at the time as the new farmers ( Neubauern ).   On 16 March 1990 the Modrow Law ( Gesetz über die Rechte der Eigentümer von Grundstücken aus der Bodenreform ) entered into force in the German Democratic Republic (GDR), lifting the restrictions regarding the transfer of title and giving those concerned full ownership rights.   After German reunification, however, certain individuals who had inherited land allocated following the agrarian reform, including the applicants, were required to transfer this land to the tax authorities of their local Länder without compensation, under the Federal Republic of Germany’s second Pecuniary Rights Amendment Act ( zweites Vermögensrechtsänderungsgesetz ) of 14 July 1992. This law stipulated that those inheriting   land acquired following the agrarian reform who had not worked in the agriculture, forestry or food-production sectors either on 15 March 1990 or during the previous 10 years, or been members of an agricultural cooperative ( Landwirtschaftliche Produktionsgenossenschaft ) in the GDR, transfer the land to the tax authorities.     Complaints   The applicants submit that the obligation for them to transfer their property without compensation, pursuant to the Federal Republic of Germany’s second Pecuniary Rights Amendment Act ( zweites Vermögensrechtsänderungsgesetz ) of 14 July 1992, infringed their right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the Convention. They also argued that they were victims of discrimination within the meaning of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) taken together with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.   Procedure   The first application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 2   September 1996 and transmitted to the Court on 1 November 1998. It was declared admissible on 25 April 2002. The second and third applications were lodged on 19 March and 23 April 2001 and were declared partly admissible on 15 May 2003. A public hearing took place in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg on 18 September 2003.   In a Chamber judgment delivered on 22 January 2004 the European Court of Human Rights considered that, even if the circumstances surrounding German reunification had to be regarded as exceptional, the lack of any compensation for the State’s taking of the applicants’ property had upset, to their detriment, the fair balance which had to be struck between the protection of property and the requirements of the general interest. The Court therefore held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and that it was not necessary to examine the allegation of a breach of Article 14 taken together with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.   On 14 June 2004 the panel of the Grand Chamber accepted a request by the German Federal Government for referral of the case to the Grand Chamber [1] .     Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Luzius Wildhaber (Swiss), President , Christos Rozakis (Greek), Jean-Paul Costa (French), Georg Ress (German), Nicolas Bratza (British), Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portuguese), Corneliu Bîrsan (Romanian) Volodymyr Butkevych (Ukrainian), Nina Vajić (Croatian), Matti Pellonpää (Finnish), Snejana Botoucharova (Bulgarian), Elisabeth Steiner (Austrian), Stanislav Pavlovschi (Moldovan), Lech Garlicki (Polish), Javier Borrego Borrego (Spanish), Khanlar Hajiyev (Azerbaijani), Ljiljana Mijović (Citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina), judges , Anatoli Kovler (Russian), Françoise Tulkens (Belgian), Giovanni Bonello (Maltese), substitute judges , and also Erik Fribergh , Deputy Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :   Almut Wittling-Vogel , Agent , Jochen A. Frowein , Counsel , Hubert Weis, Hermann-Josef Rodenbach, Wolfram Marx , Advisers ;   Applicants :   Beate Grün, Thorsten Purps, Waltraud Lange , Counsel , Volker-Ulrich Hahn , Adviser.   ***   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. Judgment will be delivered at a later date.   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Press contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15)   Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1 November 1998 it has sat as a full-time Court composed of an equal number of judges to that of the States party to the Convention. The Court examines the admissibility and merits of applications submitted to it. It sits in Chambers of 7 judges or, in exceptional cases, as a Grand Chamber of 17 judges. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe supervises the execution of the Court’s judgments. More detailed information about the Court and its activities can be found on its Internet site. [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17‑member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.