Source: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=EGMR&Datum=15.06.2006&Aktenzeichen=44353/02
Timestamp: 2019-05-26 14:33:19
Document Index: 9724923

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 6', 'Art. 13', '§ 47', '§ 53', '§ 41', '§ 47', '§ 53', '§ 33', '§ 47', '§ 53', '§ 36', '§ 62', '§ 41', '§ 15', '§ 52', '§ 41', '§ 15', '§ 41', '§ 15']

EGMR, 15.06.2006 - 44353/02 - dejure.org
https://dejure.org/2006,52462
EGMR, 15.06.2006 - 44353/02 (https://dejure.org/2006,52462)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 15.06.2006 - 44353/02 (https://dejure.org/2006,52462)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 15. Juni 2006 - 44353/02 (https://dejure.org/2006,52462)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2006,52462) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Violation of Art. 6-1 (length) Violation of Art. 13 Remainder inadmissible Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)
As to the present case, at the time when the applicant brought his complaint to the Court, he did not have any effective remedy available under the law of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in respect of the length of the pending proceedings in issue (see Atanasovic and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 13886/02, § 47, 22 December 2005 and Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 53, 15 June 2006).
In this context, the Court recalls that it is for the Contracting States to organise their legal systems in such a way that their courts can guarantee everyone's right to obtain a final decision on disputes relating to civil rights and obligations within a reasonable time (see Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 41, 15 June 2006).
Consequently, it sees no reason to depart from its earlier case-law in which it found a violation of Article 13, taken in conjunction with Article 6, due to lack of an effective remedy concerning length-of-proceedings cases that pre-dated the Adzi-Spirkoska and Others case (see Atanasovic and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 13886/02, § 47, 22 December 2005; Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 53, 15 June 2006; and Krsto Nikolov v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 13904/02, § 33, 23 October 2008).
They argued that following the Atanasovic and Kostovska judgments (see Atanasovic and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 13886/02, § 47, 22 December 2005 and Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 53, 15 June 2006), the respondent State had introduced a specifically designed remedy to address the issue of an excessive length of proceedings.
The time elapsed for the subsequent proceedings before the Supreme Court cannot be taken into consideration, since the Supreme Court had no competence to decide the case (see paragraph 24 above) and the applicant was not required to exhaust it (see Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 36, 15 June 2006).
According to the Court's case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 62, 15 June 2006).
In this context, the Court recalls that it is for the Contracting States to organise their legal systems in such a way that their courts can guarantee everyone's right to obtain a final decision on disputes relating to civil rights and obligations within a reasonable time (see Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 41, 15 June 2006; Muti v. Italy, judgment of 23 March 1994, Series A no. 281-C, § 15).
In any case, the Court notes that the Government have already acknowledged the lack of an effective remedy in respect of the length of proceedings under the then applicable rules (see Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 52, 15 June 2006).
The Court recalls that it is for the Contracting States to organise their legal systems in such a way that their courts can guarantee everyone's right to obtain a final decision on disputes relating to civil rights and obligations within a reasonable time (see Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 41, 15 June 2006 and Muti v. Italy, judgment of 23 March 1994, Series A no. 281-C, § 15).
The Court recalls that it is for the Contracting States to organise their legal systems in such a way that their courts can guarantee everyone's right to obtain a final decision on disputes relating to civil rights and obligations within a reasonable time (see Kostovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 44353/02, § 41, 15 June 2006; Muti v. Italy, judgment of 23 March 1994, Series A no. 281-C, § 15).
EGMR, 10.06.2010 - 19315/06
DEMERDZIEVA AND OTHERS v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
EGMR, 22.10.2009 - 19290/04
TRPESKI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
EGMR, 22.10.2009 - 39151/04
KAMBERI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
EGMR, 25.09.2008 - 12582/03
SAVOV AND OTHERS v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
EGMR, 05.07.2007 - 22931/03
EGMR, 01.03.2007 - 66907/01
EGMR, 07.05.2009 - 24660/03
BOGDANSKA DUMA v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
EGMR, 08.01.2009 - 17010/04
KANGOVA v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
EGMR, 13.11.2006 - 37018/03
KOCAROVA v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"