(Application no. 42194/05)
15 September 2009
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Tamir and Others v. Romania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Luis López Guerra,
Ann Power, judges,
and Santiago Quesada, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 25 August 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
On 13 March 2007 Mr Paul Ebner, the son and only heir of the seventh applicant, Mrs Margareta Ebner, informed the Court that the latter had died on 29 January 2004 and expressed his wish to pursue the application.
I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
II. RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW
I. SCOPE OF THE APPLICATION
The first six applicants are therefore the sole applicants for the purposes of this application.
II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 1 OF PROTOCOL NO. 1
“Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.
The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties.”
There has accordingly been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
III. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION
It follows that this complaint is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
IV. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
“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.”
B. Costs and expenses
In the present case, regard being had to the information in its possession and the above criteria, the Court considers it reasonable to award them jointly the sum of EUR 1,000 covering costs and expenses under all heads.
C. Default interest
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY
(a) that the respondent State is to pay jointly to the applicants, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, the amount of EUR 181,000 (one hundred and eighty-one thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of pecuniary damage;
(b) that the respondent State is to pay jointly to the applicants, within the same three-month period, the amount of EUR 1,000 (one thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to them, in respect of costs and expenses;
(c) that the aforementioned amounts shall be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(d) 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;
Done in English, and notified in writing on 15 September 2009, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Santiago Quesada Josep