- Government of Montenegro
ECHR delivers four judgments against Montenegro an...
Please note: The page below represents the archived content relating to the previous Government of Montenegro. Some of the information might be inaccurate or outdated.
Archive
ECHR delivers four judgments against Montenegro and one decision in favour of Montenegro
Published on: Mar 5, 2020 • 6:28 PM Author: PR Service
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg delivered four judgments, finding a violation of Article 6 paragraph 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") concerning the excessive length of civil proceeding. The Court delivered one decision, dismissing the application as manifestly ill-founded, in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
These applications were filed with the European Court of Human Rights from 2011 to 2013 and are older cases.
In the case of Glušica and Đurović v. Montenegro, the applicants complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute. 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 this complaint. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive (7 years, 9 months and 19 days) and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement. This complaint is therefore admissible and discloses a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings. The Court holds that the respondent State is to pay the amount of EUR 2,100 for non-pecuniary damage per applicant and dismisses the remainder of the applicants’ claim for just satisfaction.
In the case of Marković v. Montenegro, the applicant complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement. He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. 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 this complaint. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive (7 years, 7 months and 9 days) and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement. The Court holds that the respondent State is to pay the amount of EUR 2,100 awarded for non-pecuniary damage and the amount of EUR 100 awarded for costs and expenses and dismisses the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction.
In the case of Sinanović and Others v. Montenegro, the applicants complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. 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 this complaint. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive (10 years and 2 days) and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement. This complaint is therefore admissible and discloses a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. The Court holds that the respondent State is to pay the amount of EUR 2,900 for non-pecuniary damage per applicant and the amount of EUR 500 awarded for costs and expenses per application and dismisses the remainder of the applicants’ claim for just satisfaction
In the case of Piletić v. Montenegro, the applicant complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement. She relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. 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 this complaint. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive (7 years, 7 months and 15 days) and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement. This complaint is therefore admissible and discloses a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. The Court holds that the respondent State is to pay the amount of EUR 1,200 for non-pecuniary damage and the amount of EUR 100 awarded for costs and expenses and dismisses the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction.
In the case of Kuljić v. Montenegro, the Court declares the application inadmissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that the respondent Government cannot be held liable for excessive length of civil proceedings. Considering the applicant’s contribution to the duration of the impugned proceedings, as well as their complexity, the Court finds that the length in the present case cannot be considered excessive. Consequently, the Court finds that the application is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
Related articles:
Press release from the 64th Cabinet session Jan 16, 2025
Is this page useful?