CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 juillet 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 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   Communicated on 12 July 2018   FIRST SECTION Application no. 18551/17 Tonina GUCIĆ and Others against Croatia lodged on 2 March 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the applicants’ complaint, under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, that they were not given opportunity to participate effectively and defend their interests in the criminal proceedings against third parties in which a significant amount of money had been confiscated from them (approximately EUR 134,000 from each of the applicants) on the grounds that it represented a pecuniary gain obtained by the commission of the offence. In particular, the criminal proceedings at issue were instituted against third parties on charges of concluding disadvantageous commercial contracts for a company owned by the applicants and one of the accused, which eventually resulted in an unlawful increase of their shares in the company’s assets. In the course of the proceedings, the applicants did not have a formally recognised status of parties to the proceedings although they were given an opportunity to lodge an appeal against the first-instance judgment with regard to the decision on confiscation of the proceeds of crime. The applicants argue, however, that the possibility of lodging an appeal was in itself insufficient to protect their interests in the proceedings, in particular given what was at stake for them and the complexity of the case. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Did the applicants have an effective opportunity to participate and defend their interests in the criminal proceedings against third parties in which a significant amount of money had been confiscated from them on the grounds that it represented a pecuniary gain obtained by the commission of the offence, as required under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, for instance, Silickienė v. Lithuania , no. 20496/02, §§ 47-50, 10 April 2012, and, mutatis mutandis , Ünsped Paket Servisi SaN. Ve TiC. A.Ş. v. Bulgaria , no. 3503/08, §§ 46-47 and 51, 13 October 2015)?   APPENDIX     1. Tonina GUCIĆ is a Croatian national who was born in 1950 and lives in Zagreb;   2. Cicilija GEČEVIĆ is a Croatian national who was born in 1976 and lives in Zagreb;   3. Ante GUCIĆ is a Croatian national who was born in 1973 and lives in Zagreb.   They are all represented by Mr M. Matijević, a lawyer practising in Osijek.