Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) of Court (Third Section Committee), May 21, 2015 (case CASE OF ILIE GUȚĂ AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA)

DefenseROMANIA
Resolution DateMay 21, 2015
Issuing OrganizationCourt (Third Section Committee)

THIRD SECTION

CASE OF ILIE GUȚĂ AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

(Applications nos. 36255/05, 20167/08, 21294/08, 25300/09, 46087/09 and 72306/13)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

21 May 2015

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the cases of Ilie Guță and Others v. Romania,

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

             Luis López Guerra, President,              Johannes Silvis,              Valeriu Griţco, judges,and Karen Reid, Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 23 April 2015,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

  1. The case originated in applications against Romania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

  2. The applications were communicated to the Government.

    THE FACTS

  3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

  4. The applicants complained of the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions according to which the applicants were entitled to various pecuniary amounts and/or to have certain actions taken by State authorities in their favour.

  5. In some of the applications, the applicants also raised complaints under other provisions of the Convention.

    THE LAW

    1. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS

  6. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to join them in a single judgment.

    1. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION AND OF ARTICLE 1 OF PROTOCOL No. 1

  7. The applicants complained of the non-enforcement or the delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given in their favour. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. Insofar as relevant, these Articles read as follows:

    Article 6 § 1

    “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by a ... tribunal”

    Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

    “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.

    The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair...

To continue reading

Request your trial