CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 mars 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sD37F5C3B { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s7BE5FA7D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s5A1EE61 { width:111.26%; border-collapse:collapse } .sEBCD263B { height:28.6pt } .sBFF09201 { width:8.72%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sCAD28C0A { width:23.68%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s1079D335 { width:22.54%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE681BE16 { width:22.52%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s8A71A6DB { width:8.72%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s36F5F59E { width:23.68%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE8494BAD { width:22.54%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF0AF42D8 { width:22.52%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 12 April 2021   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 56741/18 Robert BLAZHESKI and Others against North Macedonia lodged on 26 November 2018 communicated on 23 March 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE With a judgment of 23 May 2012 rendered in criminal proceedings in which third parties were convicted of fraud or/and abuse of office in respect of a sale of shares on the stock exchange, the Shtip Court of Appeal, acting as a court of first instance in the matter, confiscated the profit (equivalent to approximately 1,641.000 euros (EUR)) the applicants had acquired from the sales transaction, including the money used for the purchase of the shares in question (equivalent to approximately EUR 621,000). The court found that the confiscated amount was a result of the third parties’ criminal activities, who, acting as trustees, had sold the shares to the applicants at a lower price than authorised and subsequently the applicants had obtained profit by reselling those shares. The court made no findings concerning the applicants’ awareness of the third parties’ criminal activities. In proceedings upon a legality review request submitted by the State public prosecutor in respect of all applicants, on 1 November 2017 the plenary of the Supreme Court confirmed the earlier judgments and the findings about the criminal origin of the confiscated money. This judgment was served on the applicants on 20 June and 9 July 2018.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ peaceful enjoyment of possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol   No.   1, stemming from the confiscation of their money used for the purchase of the shares in question? 2.     If so, was that interference in accordance with Article 1 of Protocol   No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, was it necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest? Finally, did it impose an excessive individual burden on the applicants (compare Balsamo v. San Marino , nos. 20319/17 and 21414/17, 8 October 2019)?   APPENDIX   No. Applicant’s Name Birth year Nationality Place of residence 1. Robert BLAZHESKI 1966 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia Skopje 2. Krste BLAZHESKI 1963 Struga 3. Gerasim VANCHEV 1962 Skopje