CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 28 mai 2018

.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 28 May 2018   FIRST SECTION Application no. 39650/17 Afrim HASANI against Croatia lodged on 29 May 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The present case is a follow-up case to the judgment adopted in the case of Boljević v. Croatia (no. 43492/11, 31 January 2017) where the Court found a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on account of the confiscation of the entire amount of money that should have been declared to the customs authorities, as an additional sanction to the fine imposed. The applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that the confiscation of 19,700 euros (EUR) from him violated his right to property. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES Was the confiscation of EUR 19,700, for failing to declare the sum of EUR   20,000 to the Croatian customs authorities, necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, in the circumstances of the present case, did that measure strike the requisite fair balance between the demands of the general interest and the requirement to protect the applicant’s right of property? Did it impose a disproportionate and excessive burden on him, having particular regard to the severity of the sanction (see, for example, Boljević v. Croatia , no. 43492/11, 31 January 2017)?