CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 2 septembre 2013

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s72EB7DC5 { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sC295E44D { border:0.75pt solid #949494; border-collapse:collapse } .s9D38DC82 { border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sAC012AE5 { border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE33A8ED { border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF42CB81 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s85D71A24 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s3DE46EBF { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sD3B88E32 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA30831E3 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .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 }       FOURTH SECTION Application no. 79867/12 Stojanka ĐURIĆ and others against Bosnia and Herzegovina and 5 other applications (see list appended) STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicants, Ms Stojanka Đurić, Ms Željka Đurić, Mr Miloš Đurić, Ms Cvijeta Bošnjak, Ms Mira Bošnjak, Ms Biljana Bošnjak, Ms Dragana Bošnjak, Mr Boro Bojanić, Ms Zorka Bojanić, Ms Danijela Banjac, Ms   Đuja Čolić, Ms Smilja Čolić, Ms Dijana Čolić, Mr Duško Čolić, Ms   Dejana Čolić, Mr Neđo Lazarević, Mr Rajko Komljenović and Ms   Jevrosima Komljenović are citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina. They are all represented by Ms R. Plavšić, a lawyer practising in Banja Luka. A.     The circumstances of the cases The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. By six judgments of the Banja Luka Court of First Instance (“the Court of First Instance”) of 17 February 2000, 25 October 2000, 12 December 2008, 8 July 2003, 11 February 2003 and 31 August 1999, which became final respectively on 15 May 2001, 18 March 2004, 12 January 2009, 30   June 2005 and 4 December 2000, the Republika Srpska (an Entity of Bosnia and Herzegovina) was ordered to pay the applicants different sums in compensation for war damage. The Court of First Instance issued writs of execution ( rješenje o izvršenju) on 24 August 2001, 16 August 2004, 4 April 2011, 8 August 2007, 27 April 2009 and 28 March 2001. The judgments remain unenforced until the present day. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice The relevant domestic law and practice were outlined in Čolić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina , nos. 1218/07 et al., §§ 10-12, 10   November 2009, and Runić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina , nos. 28735/06 et al ., 15 November 2011, § 11. Following the identification of the exact number of unenforced judgments and the aggregated debt (3,788 judgments and 180,528,214.21 convertible marks (BAM) [1] ), completed in accordance with the 2010 Action Plan [2] , on 9 October 2012 the Republika Srpska introduced a new settlement plan. It envisages that final judgments ordering payment of war damages will be enforced in cash within 13 years starting from 2013, in the order in which they were received at the Ministry of Finance of the Republika Srpska provided the creditors had submitted necessary documents. Furthemore, 50 euros will be paid in compensation for non-pecuniary damage. This amount shall be paid, in the first place, in respect of final judgments which had already been enforced by way of government bonds. The non-pecuniary damage in respect of other judgments will be paid in the same year in which the judgment in question will be enforced in accordance with the settlement plan. COMPLAINT The applicants essentially complain about the failure by the national authorities to enforce final judgments in their favour.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES   1.     Is the Republika Srpska’s settlement plan on the enforcement of final domestic judgments ordering the payment of war damages, adopted on 9   October 2012, in accordance with Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, is the proposed time-frame in accordance with those Articles?   2.     What is a method of calculating default interest in the Republika Srpska?   Appendix     File No Case Name Date of lodging 1. 79867/12 ĐURIĆ v. Bosnia and Herzegovina 04/12/2012 2. 79873/12 BOŠNJAK v. Bosnia and Herzegovina 04/12/2012 3. 80027/12 BOJANIĆ and BANJAC v. Bosnia and Herzegovina 04/12/2012 4. 80182/12 ČOLIĆ v. Bosnia and Herzegovina 04/12/2012 5. 80203/12 LAZAREVIĆ v. Bosnia and Herzegovina 04/12/2012 6. 115/13 KOMLJENOVIĆ v. Bosnia and Herzegovina 05/12/2012   [1] The convertible mark uses the same fixed exchange rate to the euro that the German mark has: EUR 1 = BAM 1.95583. [2] Odluka o usvajanju Akcionog plana za utvrđivanje ukupnih obaveza po osnovu materijalne i nematerijalne štete nastale u periodu ratnih dejstava od 20. maja 1992. do 19.juna 1996. godine ; published in the Official gazette of the Republika Srpska, no. 136/10.