CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 8 juin 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sAE73F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:10pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4B8D41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt } .s91F6AE57 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold } .s7A5A2521 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s2CE7C1B9 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sB6D33163 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3C4DB099 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:10pt } .s8A3CF085 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt; font-size:10pt } .s4E9F1CBD { width:27.25pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sE926D4E4 { width:22.95pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s55F3056A { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:108pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt; font-size:10pt } .sFED97BC8 { width:62.1pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sE3FD21FE { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:108pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-108pt; font-size:10pt } .s37F83B99 { width:36.13pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s7940ED5C { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline } .s595A57E4 { width:85.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sEF7339C2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:72pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt; font-size:10pt } .sAAD06E57 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:108pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s45EFE39E { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s5A791C10 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; text-decoration:underline } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s7C768949 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0000ff } 459 08.06.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER HEARING ATANASIU AND POENARU AND SOLON v. ROMANIA     The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Chamber hearing today, Tuesday   8   June   2010, at 9.00 a.m ., on the admissibility and merits in the cases of Atanasiu and Poenaru v. Romania and Solon   v.   Romania (application nos. 30767/05 and 33800/06). The hearing will be broadcast from 2.30 p.m. on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   These applications were lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 11 August 2005 and 4 August 2006 respectively.   Both cases raise questions under Article 6 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) and Article 1 of Protocol No.   1 (protection of property) to the Convention.   The Court has decided that these cases, which concern the systemic problem of restitution or compensation in respect of properties nationalised or confiscated by the communist State in Romania, should be dealt with under the “pilot judgment” procedure [1] , which is designed to achieve an overall settlement of large groups of identical cases.     Atanasiu and Poenaru v. Romania (application no. 30767/05)   The applicants, Mrs Maria Atanasiu and Mrs Ileana Iuliana Poenaru, are Romanian nationals who were born in 1912 and 1937 respectively and live in Bucharest. The case mainly concerns the applicants’ alleged inability to obtain access to a court in order to claim ownership of a nationalised flat, and the delay on the part of the administrative authorities in ruling on their restitution request.   The applicants are the heirs of Mr Atanasiu, who owned a building located in Bucharest that was nationalised in 1950. After 1989, relying on the provisions of the ordinary law, the applicants brought an action before the Romanian courts to recover a number of flats in the late Mr Atanasiu’s building. The domestic courts took the view that the nationalisation of the property had been unlawful and ordered the restitution of seven of the flats, together with compensation for an eighth flat.   As regards that last flat, with which the present application is concerned, the High Court of Cassation and Justice, in a judgment of 11 March 2005, declared a claim by the applicants inadmissible on the ground that they should have followed the procedure then in force, under Law no. 10/2001 on the legal regime of nationalised property, in order to seek restitution of the property or compensation. They subsequently filed a request for the restitution of the flat in accordance with that Law and, not having received a reply within the statutory time-limit, brought an action against the city council of Bucharest. On 18 April 2005 the High Court of Cassation and Justice found against the council and ordered it to address the applicants’ request, but the local authorities have not yet issued any decision.       Solon   v.   Romania (no. 33800/06)   The applicant, Mrs Ileana Florica Solon, is a Romanian national who was born on 17 September 1935 and lives in Bucharest. Her application concerns her inability to obtain compensation under Law no.   10/2001, as amended, in respect of a plot of land nationalised and used by the University of Craiova.   The applicant filed a request for compensation with the University of Craiova. In a decision of 10 July 2001 the chief administrator of the university dismissed her request. That decision was annulled by the High Court of Cassation and Justice in a final judgment of 30 March 2006, ordering that she be paid compensation. The chief administrator of the university agreed in March 2009 and sent the file to the National Authority for Property Restitution. According to the information submitted by the parties, the applicant has still not received the compensation due to her.     These cases will be heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Josep Casadevall (Andorra), President , Elisabet Fura (Sweden), Corneliu Bîrsan (Romania), Alvina Gyulumyan (Armenia), Egbert Myjer (the Netherlands), Ineta Ziemele (Latvia), Ann Power (Ireland), judges , Boštjan M. Zupančič (Slovenia), Luis López Guerra (Spain), substitute judges , and also Santiago Quesada , Section Registrar .     Representatives of the parties   Government:     Răzvan-Horaţiu Radu , Agent,     Horia Rogoveanu , Irina Cambrea, Dragoş Dumitrache , and Ana-Maria Valica , Advisers ;   Applicants:     Atanasiu and Poenaru v. Romania:     Corneliu-Liviu Popescu and Corina-Ruxandra Popescu , Counsel ;   Solon v. Romania: Raluca-Andreea Niculescu-Gorpin and Maria Niculesscu-Gorpin , Counsel .   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which will be held in private. Its ruling in the case will, however, be made at a later stage.   The press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions, judgments and further information about the Court can be found on its Internet site . To receive the Court’s press releases, you can subscribe to the Court's RSS feeds .   Press contacts [email protected] / +33 3 90 21 42 08 Stefano Piedimonte (telephone: + 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : + 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : + 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : + 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone : + 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: + 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] See press release of 25 February 2010 .