Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> BOLJEVIC AND OTHERS v. MONTENEGRO - 21609/20 (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial : First Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 374 (25 April 2024)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2024/374.html
Cite as: [2024] ECHR 374
[New search] [Contents list] [Help]
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF BOLJEVIĆ AND OTHERS v. MONTENEGRO
(Application no. 21609/20)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
25 April 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Boljević and Others v. Montenegro,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Péter Paczolay, President,
Gilberto Felici,
Raffaele Sabato, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 4 April 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
1. The case originated in an application against Montenegro lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") on 10 April 2020.
2. The applicants were represented by Mr B. Ćupić, a lawyer practising in Podgorica.
3. The Montenegrin Government ("the Government") were given notice of the application.
THE FACTS
4. The applicants' details and information relevant to the application are set out in the appended table.
5. The applicants complained of the non-enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned companies.
6. On 18 July 2019 the Constitutional Court found a violation of the applicants' rights under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on account of non-enforcement. The applicants were awarded 2,000 euros (EUR) each in non-pecuniary damage. However, the domestic decisions under consideration remain unenforced until the present day.
THE LAW
- ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION AND OF ARTICLE 1 OF PROTOCOL No. 1
7. The applicants complained principally of the non-enforcement of domestic decisions given in their favour. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and on Article 1 of Protocol No.
1.
8. The Court reiterates that the execution of a judgment given by any court must be regarded as an integral part of a "hearing" for the purposes of Article 6. It also refers to its case-law concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of final domestic judgments (see Hornsby v. Greece, no. 18357/91, § 40, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-II).
9. The Court further notes that the decisions in the present case ordered specific action to be taken. The Court therefore considers that the decisions in question constitute "possessions" within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No.
1.
10. In the leading cases of R. Kačapor and Others v. Serbia (nos. 2269/06 and 5 others, §§ 97-99, 106-16 and 119-20, 15 January 2008), and Mijanović v. Montenegro (no. 19580/06, §§ 81-91, 17 September 2013), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
11. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the authorities did not deploy all necessary efforts to enforce fully and in due time the decisions in the applicants' favour.
12. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No.
1.
- APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
13. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and its own case-law (see, in particular, R. Kačapor and Others, cited above, §§ 123-26; Stošić v. Serbia, no. 64931/10, §§ 66-68, 1 October 2013; and Mastilović and Others v. Montenegro, no. 28754/10, § 52, 24 February 2022) the Court considers it reasonable not to award the applicants compensation in respect of non-pecuniary damage because it has already been awarded domestically (see paragraph 6 above), but to award the sum for costs and expenses indicated in the appended table.
14. The Court further notes that the respondent State has an outstanding obligation to enforce the domestic decisions which remain enforceable.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
- Declares the application admissible;
- Holds that this application discloses a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning the non-enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned companies;
- Holds that the respondent State shall ensure, by appropriate means, within three months, the enforcement of the pending domestic decisions referred to in the appended table;
- Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amount indicated in the appended table at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount 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 25 April 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Péter Paczolay
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
(non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned companies)
Date of introduction | Applicant's name Year of birth
| Representative's name and location | Relevant domestic decision | Start date of non-enforcement period | End date of non-enforcement period Length of enforcement proceedings | Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros)[1] |
10/04/2020 (66 applicants) | Goran BOLJEVIĆ 1961 Tatjana BOLJEVIĆ 1969 Slobodan ŠOĆ 1949 Veselin MARTINOVIĆ 1946 Slavica BULATOVIĆ 1955 Đina JANINOVIĆ 1963 Đon IVEZIĆ 1942 Dragoljub VUKČEVIĆ 1962 Ana IVANOVIĆ 1998 Bajram KOĆIĆ 1941 Rajko RADULOVIĆ 1953 Goran RADONJIĆ 1963 Žarko MADŽAROVIĆ 1949 Radmila LAKOVIĆ 1967 Zdravko ČAĐENOVIĆ 1957 Željko ĐUKANOVIĆ 1962 Nataša DRAGOJEVIĆ 1946 Simuna MATKOVIĆ 1946 Savo GLOBAREVIĆ 1941 Milenko JOVANOVIĆ 1949 Ibrahim TUZOVIĆ 1948 Slobodan SEKULOVIĆ 1949 Boško POPOVIĆ 1950 Miodrag PRELEVIĆ 1950 Biserka ZLATIČANIN 1949 Dragan STAMATOVIĆ 1957 Ilija PEŠIĆ 1952 Radovan MILAŠEVIĆ 1953 Goran PEJOVIĆ 1972
Radovan ŠĆEKIĆ 1950 Luka PEROVIĆ 1984 Danilo MILIĆ 1942 Zorka MARKOVIĆ 1982 Žikica GARČEVIĆ 1962 Duško BUŠKULIĆ 1958 Stanica STANIŠIĆ 1963 Veselinka BOJANIĆ 1954 Zorica RADOJEVIĆ 1964 Slavka PETROVIĆ 1958 Tomislav ŠIŠEVIĆ 1951 Milenka RADULOVIĆ 1952 Spasoje GRBA 1951 Tatjana RAČIĆ 1971 Milan MARKOVIĆ 1949 Radmila ĐURIŠIĆ 1953 Sanja LEKOVIĆ 1954
Goran KALEZIĆ 1961 Miodrag ŠĆEPANOVIĆ 1950 Veljko RADUNOVIĆ 1954 Ilinka MILIĆ 1952 Lazar LAZAREVIĆ 1970 Slavica ŠUNDIĆ 1949 Milan RADULOVIĆ 1981 Cvetko MARAŠ 1949 Miljan KLJALJIĆ 1940 Veselin ĐUROVIĆ 1964 Slavica VUČUROVIĆ 1955 Jagoš OBRADOVIĆ 1950 Sava MARJANOVIĆ 1958 Nika LJULJĐUROVIĆ 1970
Household Nikola MIRKOVIĆ 1982 Danka POPOVIĆ 1979 Danilo MIRKOVIĆ 1977
Household Nevenka MILIČKOVIĆ 1971 Nada POTPARA 1957 Željko DŽOGAZOVIĆ 1944
| Ćupić Branislav Podgorica | Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicants Pešić, Radulović Milenka, Matković, Milić I., Bulatović, Janinović, Leković, Dragojević, Džogazović, Potpara and Miličković, Zlatičanin, Kljajić, Madžarović, Šoć, Jovanović, Marjanović, Globarević, Lazarević, Bojanić, Garčević, Buškulić, Radojević, and Radulović Milan), 03/07/2009
Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicants Martinović, Čađenović, Vukčević, Maraš, Radunović, Marković M., Tuzović, Radonjić, Ivezić, Radulović R., Boljević T.), 10/09/2009
Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicants Sekulović, Šćekić, Popović, Grba, Đurišić, and Marković Z.), 15/07/2009 Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicant Djukanovic), 10/09/2009
Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicant Kalezić), 04/12/2009
Court of First Instance (applicant Obradović), 27/01/2010
Court of First Instance (applicants Petrović, Boljević G., and Laković), 27/01/2010
Court of First Instance (applicant Šundić), 18/12/2009
Court of First Instance (applicants Ivanović A., Šišević, and Đurović), 22/02/2010
Court of First Instance (applicants Prelević, Vučurović, Pejović, Šćepanović, and Mirković N, Mirković N, and Popović D.), 16/11/2009
Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicant Obradović), 07/10/2010
Court of First Instance (applicants Pešić, Radulović M., Matković, Milić I., Janinović, Leković, Dragojević, Džogazović, Potpara and Miličković, Kljajić, Madžarović, Šoć, Jovanović M., Marjanović, Globarević, Lazarević, Bojanić, Garčević, Buškulić, Radojević, Martinović, Čađenović, Vukčević, Maraš, Radunović, Marković M., Tuzović, Radonjić, Ivezić, Radulović R., Boljević T., Sekulović, Šćekić, Popović, Grba, Đurišić, Marković Z., Obradovic, Radulović M., Zlatičanin, Stanišić, Perović, Koćić, Račić, and Stamatović), 07/10/2010
Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicant Boljević G.), 06/12/2012
Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicants Pešić, Radulović M., Matković, Milić I., Janinović, Leković, Dragojević, Džogazović, Potpara and Miličković, Kljajić, Madžarević, Šoć, Jovanović M., Marjanović, Globarević, Lazarević, Bojanić, Garčević, Buškulić, Radojević, Martinović, Čađenović, Vukčević, Maraš, Radunović, Marković M., Tuzović, Radonjić, Ivezić, Radulović R., Boljević T., Sekulović, Šćekić, Grba, Đurišić, Marković Z., Obradović, Radulović M., Zlatičanin, Stanišić, Koćić, Račić, Stamatović, Milić D., Milašević, Prelević, Vučurović, Pejović, Šćepanović, Mirković N., Mirković N., and Popović D., Kalezić, Đukanović, Šundić, Petrović, Boljević G., and Laković), 11/07/2014
Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicant Laković), 06/12/2012
Court of First Instance Podgorica (applicants Pešić, Radulović Milenka, Matković, Milić I., Janinović, Leković, Madžarović, Šoć, Jovanović M., Marjanović, Globarević, Lazarević, Bojanić, Garčević, Buškulić, Radojević, Martinović, Čađenović, Vukčević, Maraš, Radunović, Marković M., Tuzović, Radonjić, Ivezić, Radulović R., Boljević T., Sekulović, Šćekić, Popović, Grba, Đurišić, Marković Z., Obradović, Radulović M., Zlatičanin, Stanišić, Perović, Račić, Stamatović, Radulović Milan, Koćić, Milić D., Prelević, Vučurović, Pejović, Mirković N., Mirković D, and Popović D., Kalezić, Đukanović, Šundić, and Petrović S.), 06/12/2012
Commercial Court of Montenegro (all the applicants except Ljuljđurović N.), 16/10/2017
| 25/09/2009
22/12/2009
22/12/2009
10/03/2010
10/03/2010
31/03/2010
31/03/2010
20/05/2010
30/06/2010
17/09/2010
22/02/2011
24/01/2013
11/12/2013
11/07/2014
27/02/2015
31/07/2015
28/11/2017
| pending more than 14 years, 5 months and 20 days
pending more than 14 years, 2 months and 23 days
pending more than 14 years, 2 months and 23 days
pending more than 14 years and 6 days
pending more than 14 years and 6 days
pending more than 13 years, 11 months and 16 days
pending more than 13 years, 11 months and 16 days
pending more than 13 years, 9 months and 25 days
pending more than 13 years, 8 months and 16 days
pending more than 13 years, 5 months and 28 days
pending more than 13 years and 23 days
pending more than 11 years, 1 month and 21 days
pending more than 10 years, 3 months and 5 days
pending more than 9 years, 8 months and 5 days
pending more than 9 years and 18 days
pending more than 8 years, 7 months and 16 days
pending more than 6 years, 3 months and 17 days
| 250 |
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.