CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 7 février 2008

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 105 February 2008 Parizov v. "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" - 14258/03 Judgment 7.2.2008 [Section V] Article 35 Article 35-1 Exhaustion of domestic remedies Effective domestic remedy Failure to prove effectiveness of new domestic remedy concerning length of judicial proceedings: preliminary objection dismissed   Facts : In 1986 the applicant instituted civil proceedings for the annulment of an agreement. The case was reconsidered on several occasions. The applicant’s appeal on points of law is now pending before the Supreme Court. Law : Admissibility : The remedy concerning the excessive length of the proceedings had been introduced by the 2006 Act as of 1 January 2007. The applicant had not availed himself of it. The 2006 Act provided for a compensatory remedy – a request for just satisfaction – through which a party could, where appropriate, be awarded just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary and pecuniary damage sustained. A compensatory remedy was an appropriate means of redressing a violation that had already occurred. However, some provisions of the Act were susceptible to different interpretations. It defined two courts which could decide upon such a remedy: the immediately higher court and the Supreme Court. It did not specify which court would be competent where, as in the applicant’s case, the case was pending before the Supreme Court. Statutes could not be absolutely precise. The interpretation and application of such provisions depended on practice. However, although more than twelve months had elapsed after the introduction of the remedy, there was still no domestic case-law on the point. Finally, unlike Slovenian, Polish and Italian laws which contained transitional provisions concerning cases pending before the Court, the 2006 Act did not contain any provisions explicitly bringing within the jurisdiction of the national courts all applications pending before the Court irrespective of whether they were still pending at domestic level. Bearing in mind that the applicant’s case had been pending before the domestic courts for more than twenty years   before the introduction of the remedy   by the 2006 Act and was still not decided and that no conclusions could be drawn from the Government’s submissions about its effectiveness   in the particular circumstances of the instant case, it would be disproportionate to require the applicant to try that remedy. Accordingly, the Government’s objection of a failure to exhaust domestic remedies was rejected.   Merits : Article 6 § 1 – The length of the proceedings (over twenty-one years, of which ten years and nine months fell within the Court’s temporal jurisdiction) had been excessive. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 41 – EUR 4,000 for non-pecuniary damage.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes