CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 juin 2016

.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 } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 16 June 2016   FIRST SECTION Application no. 8787/13 Spase SPASENOSKI against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia lodged on 26 January 2013 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant’s request that bankruptcy proceedings be opened in respect of a company-debtor was dismissed by a single judge and, subsequently by a bankruptcy panel, which decided in second instance. The Bitola Court of Appeal rejected his further appeal, notwithstanding that section   12(5) of the Bankruptcy Act ( Закон за стечај , Official Gazette no.34/2006, 126/2006, 84/2007, 47/2011) provided that decisions of the bankruptcy panel were amenable to appeal. The applicant invokes Article 13 of the Convention, alleging that he was deprived of access to a court. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Having regard to the Bitola Court of Appeal’s decision of 5 November 2012 rejecting the applicant’s appeal, was the applicant denied the right of access to a court, in breach of Article   6   §   1 of the Convention?