CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 6 mai 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sCC018295 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .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 } 365 06.05.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   Chamber judgments [1]   concerning Bulgaria and   “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following two Chamber judgments, available only in English.     Boris Stojanovski v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (application   no.   41916/04) The applicant, Boris Stojanovski, is a Macedonian national who was born in 1983 and lives in Skopje. In February 1994 he was injured in a fight. Relying on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time and right of access to a court) of the European Convention on Human Rights, he complained about the excessive length of the criminal proceedings brought against the two people who had allegedly caused him grievous bodily harm and about the fact that no decision had ever been taken concerning his compensation claim brought in the course of those proceedings as the courts had advised him to bring a separate civil action for damages. Violation of Article 6 § 1 (fairness) No violation of Article 6 § 1 (length) Just satisfaction: claim dismissed     Length-of-proceedings case   Kabakchievi v. Bulgaria (no. 8812/07) In this case, the applicants complained under Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the Convention about the excessive length of non-criminal proceedings and the lack of a domestic remedy in respect of that complaint. Violation of Article 6 § 1 (length) Violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 6 § 1   ***   These summaries by the Registry do not bind the Court. The full texts of the Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)   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. [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.