THIRD SECTION
CASE OF LACEJ AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA
(Application no. 22122/08)
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT
 
 
 
 
STRASBOURG
29 September 2022
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Lacej and Others v. Albania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
 Andreas Zünd, President,
 Darian Pavli,
 Frédéric Krenc, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 8 September 2022,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application against Albania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 5 April 2008. 2. The applicants were represented by Mr B. Muslija, a lawyer practising in Shkoder. 3. The Albanian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the application. THE FACTS
4. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the application are set out in the appended table. 5. The applicants complained in substance of the excessive length of civil proceedings, in particular those before the Supreme Court. THE LAW
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 ...”
Applicants Sadik Llukacej and Adan Ulqinaku
7. As to the applicants Sadik Llukacej and Adnan Ulqinaku, having regard to the materials before it the Court observes that these applicants were not a party to the domestic proceedings in question. Therefore, those applicants cannot claim to be a “victim” of a violation of their Convention rights because of the allegedly lengthy proceedings. It follows that in their regard the complaint is incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention. Remaining three applicants, Hasan Lacej, Kisha Orthodokse Autoqefale e Shqipërisë and Komuniteti Musliman i Shqipërisë
8. As to the applicants, Hasan Lacej, Kisha Orthodokse Autoqefale e Shqipërisë (Kisha Orthodokse), Komuniteti Musliman i Shqipërisë (Komuniteti Musliman), the Court notes that they participated in the domestic proceedings in question, including those before the Supreme Court. In the light of the elements in its possession, the Court observes that the appeal on points of law was registered on 26 January 2010 before the Supreme Court, and it was almost after four years of inactivity, that is in 2014 when the Supreme Court held four hearings on the matter. 9. In the leading cases of Luli and Others v. Albania (nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, 1 April 2014), Mishgjoni v. Albania (no. 18381/05, 7 December 2010) and Bara and Kola v. Albania (nos. 43391/18 and 17766/19, 12 October 2021) the Court already found a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 10. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of justifying the length of the proceedings at the national level, in particular before the Supreme Court. 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. 11. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
12.

Outcome for Article 6: violation