European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Mirjana PAVLESKA v the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia - 50666/06 [2010] ECHR 1920 (2 November 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/1920.html
Cite as: [2010] ECHR 1920
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
50666/06
by Mirjana PAVLESKA
against the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 2 November 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Rait
Maruste,
President,
Mirjana
Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka
Kalaydjieva,
judges,
and Stephen Phillips,
Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 November 2006,
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 26 May 2010 requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicant’s reply to that declaration,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Ms Mirjana Pavleska, is a Macedonian national who was born in 1951 and lives in Skopje. She was represented before the Court by Ms В. Dangova, a lawyer practising in Skopje. The Macedonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, R. Lazareska Gerovska. The case concerned the length of civil proceedings in which the applicant claimed compensation. The proceedings started on 15 November 1988 and ended on 25 April 2007 when the Skopje Court of First Instance terminated the proceedings.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention that her case had not been heard within a reasonable time.
THE LAW
The applicant complained about the length of the civil proceedings under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. This provision provides as follows:
“In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal...”
By letter dated 26 May 2010 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issue raised by the application. They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.
“The declaration provided, inter alia, as follows:
“... the Government would hereby like to express – by a way of unilateral declaration – its acknowledgement that in the special circumstances of the present case, the length of the domestic proceedings did not fulfil the requirement of ”reasonable time” referred to in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. Consequently, the Government is prepared to pay to the applicant the global sum of 2,730 euros (two thousand, seven hundred and thirty euros). In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the light of the Court’s case law. This sum is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as the costs and expenses and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. This sum will be payable to personal account of the applicant within three months from the date of the notification of the decision pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention ... In the light of the above and in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention the Government would like to suggest that the circumstances of the present case allow the Court to reach the conclusion that for “any other reason” it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application. Moreover, there are no reasons of a general character, as defined in Article 37 § 1 in fine, which would require the further examination of the case by virtue of that provision. Therefore, the Government invites the Court to strike the application out of its list of cases”
In a letter received by the Court on 27 July 2010 the applicant contested the Government’s declaration.
Having regard to the Court’s practice in this field (see Petkovski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 27314/04, 13 November 2008 and Ajvazi v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 30956/05, 13 November 2008) and to the nature of the admissions contained in the Government’s declaration, as well as the amount of compensation proposed, which is compatible with the amounts awarded in similar cases, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1(c)).
Moreover, in the light of the above considerations, and in particular given the clear and extensive case-law on the topic, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of this part of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine). Accordingly, it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declaration in respect of the length-of-proceedings complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and of the modalities for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.
Stephen Phillips Rait Maruste
Deputy Registrar President
