CASE OF SHARXHI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA
Hearing: Sharxhi and Others v. Albania (no. 10613/16) (Chamber hearing, 2017-05-23 00:00:00)
Application no.: 10613/16
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2018-01-11 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0111JUD001061316
Respondent state: ALB
Articles of the Convention: 6;6-1;8;8-1;8-2;13;13+6-1;13+8;13+P1-1;35;35-1;35-3-a;41;P1-1;P1-1-1
Judges: Aleš Pejchal;Armen Harutyunyan;Kristina Pardalos;Ledi Bianku;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Pauliine Koskelo
Represented by: SACCUCCI A.
Issue: Non Contractual Liability of the State Act (Law no. 8510 of 15 July 1999) ; Inspection of Buildings Act (Law no. 9780 of 16 July 2007) ; Civil Code

Strasbourg case-law cited: Akkuş v. Turkey, 9 July 1997, § 29, Reports 1997-IV;Almeida Garrett, Mascarenhas Falcão and Others v. Portugal, nos. 29813/96 and 30229/96, § 54, ECHR 2000 I;Apostol v. Georgia, no. 40765/02, §§ 64-65, ECHR 2006‑XI;Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, 27 April 1988, § 52, Series A no. 131;Brumărescu v. Romania [GC], no. 28342/95, §§ 76-78, ECHR 1999 VII;Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 68, ECHR 2009;Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, § 35, ECHR 2002 III;Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 82, ECHR 2012;Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, § 29, ECHR 2000‑IV;Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 44, ECHR 1999-VI;De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp v. Belgium (Article 50), 10 March 1972, §§ 15 16, Series A no. 14;Delijorgji v. Albania, no. 6858/11, § 100, 28 April 2015;Demades v. Turkey, no. 16219/90, 31 July 2003;Driza v. Albania, no. 33771/02, §§ 119-120, ECHR 2007 V (extracts);Fleri Soler and Camilleri v. Malta, no. 35349/05, § 65, 26 September 2006;Frendo Randon and Others v. Malta, no. 2226/10, 22 November 2011;Gjyli v. Albania, no. 32907/07, §§ 55-61, 29 September 2009;Guiso-Gallisay v. Italy (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 58858/00, 22 December 2009;Hornsby v. Greece, 19 March 1997, § 40, Reports 1997 II;Iatridis v. Greece [GC], no. 31107/96, § 66, ECHR 1999 II;Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy [GC], no. 22774/93, § 49, ECHR 1999-V;Jahn and Others v. Germany [GC], nos. 46720/99, 72203/01 and 72552/01, §§ 91-94, ECHR 2005-VI;James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 37, Series A no. 98;Kaya v. Turkey, 19 February 1998, § 106, Reports 1998 I;Khalikova v. Azerbaijan, no. 42883/11, §§ 128-129, 22 October 2015;Kolona v. Cyprus, no. 28025/03, §§ 70-78, 27 September 2007;Kozacıoğlu v. Turkey [GC], no. 2334/03, 19 February 2009;Kübler v. Germany, no. 32715/06, §§ 60-66, 13 January 2011;Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 31210/96, § 152, ECHR 2000-XI;Loizidou v. Turkey (merits), no. 15318/89, 18 December 1996, Reports 1996 VI;Luli and Others v. Albania, nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, §§ 77-84 and §§ 114-119, 1 April 2014;Manushaqe Puto and Others v. Albania, nos. 604/07 and 3 others, §§ 33-35, 31 July 2012;Micallef v. Malta [GC], no. 17056/06, §§ 87-89, ECHR 2009;Mikheyev v. Russia, no. 77617/01, § 155, 26 January 2006;Montanaro Gauci and Others v. Malta, no. 31454/12, §§ 41-48, 30 August 2016;Mullai and Others v. Albania (just satisfaction – striking out), no. 9074/07, § 18, 18 October 2011;O’Keeffe v. Ireland [GC], no. 35810/09, §§ 109-111, ECHR 2014 (extracts);Okyay and Others v. Turkey, no. 36220/97, ECHR 2005 VII;Oliari and Others v. Italy, nos. 18766/11 and 36030/11, § 78, 21 July 2015;Öneryıldız v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, ECHR 2004 XII;Papamichalopoulos and Others v. Greece, 24 June 1993, Series A no. 260 B;Paplauskienė v. Lithuania, no. 31102/06, § 51, 14 October 2014;Paradiso and Campanelli v. Italy [GC], no. 25358/12, § 169, ECHR 2017;Pavić v. Croatia, no. 21846/08, § 38, 28 January 2010;Sabanchiyeva and Others v. Russia, no. 38450/05, § 153, ECHR 2013 (extracts);Salah v. the Netherlands, no. 8196/02, §§ 65-67, ECHR 2006 IX (extracts);Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan [GC], no. 40167/06, § 217, ECHR 2015;Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, ECHR 2006 V;Serghides and Christoforou v. Cyprus (just satisfaction), no. 44730/98, § 29, 12 June 2003;Serkov v. Ukraine, no. 39766/05, § 33, 7 July 2011;Serrilli v. Italy (just satisfaction), no. 77822/01, § 17, 17 July 2008;Silva Barreira Júnior v. Portugal, nos. 38317/06 and 38319/06, § 40, 11 January 2011;Société Colas Est and Others v. France, no. 37971/97, § § 41-42, ECHR 2002 III;Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, §§ 63 and 69-74, Series A no. 52;The Holy Monasteries v. Greece, 9 December 1994, § 71, Series A no. 301-A;Urbárska Obec Trenčianske Biskupice v. Slovakia, no. 74258/01, § 115, ECHR 2007-XIII;Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, § 108, ECHR 2001-V;Zollmann v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 62902/00, ECHR 2003-XII
Conclusion: Preliminary objections joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;(Art. 35-1) Effective domestic remedy;Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 13+6-1 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 6-1 - Access to court;Fair hearing;Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Right to a fair trial);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court;Fair hearing);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for home);Violation of Article 13+8 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 8-2 - Interference;In accordance with the law;Article 8-1 - Respect for home;Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions);Violation of Article 13+P1-1 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions;Prescribed by law;Interference;Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property);Violation of Article 13+P1-1 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions;Interference;Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Deprivation of property;Peaceful enjoyment of possessions);Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: FALSE