CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 juin 2014

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .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 } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     Communicated on 30 June 2014   FIRST SECTION Application no. 39307/11 Izabel SKOKANDIĆ against Croatia lodged on 7 June 2011 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Ms Izabel Skokandić, is a Croatian national, who was born in 1965 and lives in Žrnovo. She is represented before the Court by Mr   I. Surjan, a lawyer practising in Zagreb. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 19 April 2004 the applicant applied before the Korčula Office of the Dubrovnik State Administration ( Ured državne uprave u Dubrovačko-neretvanskoj županiji, Ispostava u Korčuli ) for a permit for the construction of her house in Žrnovica. On 3 August 2004 the applicant was granted a construction permit, and this decision became final on 26 August 2004. During the construction work, on 24 May 2005, a construction inspector of the Ministry of Ecology, Spatial Planning and Construction ( Ministarstvo zaštite okoliša, prostornog uređenja i graditeljstva : hereinafter: the “Ministry”) carried out an on-site inspection and, after examining the construction permit, found no irregularities in the construction work. On 17 August 2005, based on its supervisory powers, the Ministry revoked the applicant’s construction permit on the grounds that the construction permit was not issued in accordance with the substantive provisions of the Construction Act ( Zakon o gradnji ). The applicant challenged this decision before the Administrative Court ( Upravni sud Republike Hrvatske ) on 26 September 2006 arguing that she had lawfully obtained a construction permit. On 16 May 2007 the Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s administrative action endorsing the reasoning of the Ministry. On 5 October 2007 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint before the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ) contending that by the revocation of the construction permit she had been made to bear a disproportionate individual burden. On 25 November 2010 the Constitutional Court declared the applicant’s constitutional complaint inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded. The decision of the Constitutional Court was served on the applicant on 9   December 2010. COMPLAINT The applicant complains that by the revocation of a construction permit for the construction of her house her property became precarious QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicant’s peaceful enjoyment of possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1?   2.     If so, was that interference necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties?   In particular, did that interference impose an excessive individual burden on the applicant (see Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy, [GC], no. 22774/93, § 59, ECHR 1999-V?]   The Government are requested to submit two copies of the relevant documents in the applicant’s case.