European Court of Human Rights

Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)80¹

Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

Nikolov against “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”

(Application No. 41195/02, judgment of 20/12/2007, final on 20/03/2008)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);

Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;

Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the applicant’s right to an impartial tribunal in that his case was heard by a trial judge whose wife had been employed with the defendant company shortly after the proceedings had started (violation of Article 6, paragraph1) (see details in Appendix);

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;

Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate:

- of individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and

- of general measures preventing similar violations;

DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and

DECIDES to close the examination of this case.

Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)80

Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of

Nikolov against “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”

Introductory case summary

This case concerns the violation of the applicant’s right to an impartial tribunal as a result of the fact that his case concerning the payment of insurance was heard by a trial judge whose wife had been employed with the defendant insurance company shortly after the proceedings had started. The trial judge did not bring this fact to the immediate attention of the President of the Štip Court of First Instance with a view to a possible decision on his exclusion from the case, as provided by the domestic law. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal did not address the applicant’s concerns about the judge’s impartiality in this regard (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1).

The Court noted that there was objective justification for the applicant’s apprehension that the trial judge lacked the requisite impartiality to the extent necessary under Article 6.

I. Individual measures

The Court did not award any just satisfaction to the applicant, since he failed to submit any such claim within the time-limit provided. In accordance with Article 400 of the Civil Procedure Act, the applicant is entitled to request the reopening of the proceedings.

II. General measures

The provisions of the Civil Procedure Act, in force also when the facts of this case took place, provide the possibility to exclude a trial judge from the proceedings in situations similar to those of the present case. Although there were adequate legislative guarantees, the violation in this case occurred as an isolated event.

The Court’s judgment has been translated and published on the website of the Ministry of Justice (www.pravda.gov.mk). All courts in the country, including the courts involved in the present case, have been informed of the judgment and the violation found.

III. Conclusions of the respondent state

The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that these measures will prevent similar violations and that “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.