CASE OF ŠKRBIĆ AND VUJICIC v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

 
 
 
 
FOURTH SECTION
 
 
 
CASE OF ŠKRBIĆ AND VUJIČIĆ v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
(Applications nos. 37444/17 and 75271/17)
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT
 
 
 
 
STRASBOURG
 
6 June 2019
 
 
 
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Škrbić and Vujičić v. Bosnia and Herzegovina,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Georges Ravarani, President,
Marko Bošnjak,
Péter Paczolay, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 16 May 2019,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1.  The case originated in applications against Bosnia and Herzegovina lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the dates indicated in the appended table.
2.  Notice of the applications was given to the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina (“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 excessive length of civil proceedings.
THE LAW
I.  JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS
5.  Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
II.  ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION
6.  The applicants complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
Article 6 § 1
“In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal ...”
7.  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
8.  In the leading cases of Nemet v. Serbia, no. 22543/05, 8 December 2009, and Dorić v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [Committee], no. 68811/13, 7 November 2017, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
9.  Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement.
10.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
III.  APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
11.  Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
12.  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Nemet v. Serbia, no. 22543/05, 8 December 2009), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table and to dismiss the remainder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction.
13.  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
1.  Decides to join the applications;
 
2.  Declares the applications admissible;
 
3.  Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings;
 
4.  Holds
(a)  that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b)  that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
 
5.  Dismisses the remainder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 6 June 2019, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Liv TigerstedtGeorges Ravarani
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident

APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(excessive length of civil and/or administrative proceedings)
 
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Date of birth
 
Start of proceedings
or
Date of entry into force of the Convention in respect of Bosnia and Herzegovina
(12 July 2002)
End of proceedings
Total length
Levels of jurisdiction
Relevant domestic decision
Domestic award
(in euros)
Amount awarded for
non-pecuniary damage
per applicant
(in euros)[1]
Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application
(in euros)[2]   
37444/17
11/05/2017
Živko Škrbić
10/07/1957
20/02/2004
 
13/02/2014
 
9 years and 11 months
and 25 days
3 levels of jurisdiction
 
AP-1771/14
(700)
1,200
less any amounts which may have already been paid in that regard at the domestic level
100   
75271/17
13/10/2017
Zoran Vujičić
30/07/1967
12/07/2002
 
30/04/2014
 
11 years and 9 months
and 19 days
3 levels of jurisdiction
 
AP-3300/14
(1,000)
1,800
less any amounts which may have already been paid in that regard at the domestic level
-
 
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy