THIRD SECTION
CASE OF NEVADA TOURS 2004 AD AND
BULGARIAN TOURIST COMPANY GLOBAL TOURS AD v. BULGARIA
(Applications nos. 4173/20 and 6186/20)
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT
 
STRASBOURG
10 September 2024
 
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Nevada Tours 2004 AD and Bulgarian Tourist Company Global Tours AD v. Bulgaria,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
 Georgios A. Serghides, President,
 Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir,
 Diana Kovatcheva, judges,
and Olga Chernishova, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to:
the applications against the Republic of Bulgaria lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by two Bulgarian joint-stock companies, as listed in the appended table (“the applicant companies”), on the various dates indicated therein;
the decision to give notice of the applications to the Bulgarian Government (“the Government”), represented by their Agent, Ms M. Tsocheva from the Ministry of Justice;
the parties’ observations;
Having deliberated in private on 9 July 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
1. The case is of the type examined in Kostov and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 66581/12 and 25054/15, 14 May 2020) and concerns the adequacy of compensation for expropriation under the State Property Act. In 2019 the governor of Burgas Region expropriated two plots of land owned by the applicant companies, measuring 4,103 and 14,390 square metres, for the construction of a road. The companies had been using the plots under lease agreements since 2007, and had eventually purchased them in 2018. The lease agreements had been concluded since the applicants intended to develop the land, which, even though formally considered agricultural, was part of an industrial zone in the vicinity of the city of Burgas. Under the local urban development plan of 2011 the land was allocated for public and administrative services, commerce and small private enterprises. 2. In the expropriation proceedings, which were concluded with two final judgments of the Burgas Administrative Court of 12 and 22 July 2019, the applicants’ land was considered agricultural, and in selecting comparable plots of land which had been subject to transactions in the period preceding the expropriation, in line with the criteria set out in the State Property Act (see Kostov and Others, cited above, §§ 25-26), the authorities took into account agricultural land. In particular, the Burgas Administrative Court relied on an expert report listing twenty plots of such land in the area of Burgas, which had been sold for prices varying from 0.42 Bulgarian levs (BGN) (0.21 euros – EUR) to BGN 88 (EUR 45) per square metre. The average value calculated on this ground, and accordingly the compensation awarded to the applicant companies, was equivalent of BGN 16.57 (EUR 8.47) per square metre. 3. The applicant companies complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, relying in addition on Article 13 of the Convention, that the amount of compensation was inadequate as it was considerably below the actual market value of their plots of land.

Outcome for Article P1-1: violation