FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 21226/16
Marius-Constantin AGAFIȚEI against Romania
and 4 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 13 September 2018 as a Committee composed of:
Georges Ravarani, President,
Marko Bošnjak,
Péter Paczolay, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
2. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of the Protocol No. 1 concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).
THE LAW
A. Joinder of the applications
3. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
B. Complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of the Protocol No. 1
4. In the present applications, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the non-enforcement or the delayed enforcement of the judgments given in the applicants’ favour.
5. In particular, the Court notes that in applications nos. 21226/16 and 55403/16, having regard to the particular context of the cases, namely the amounts to be paid and the domestic authorities’ assessment as to the impact of an immediate payment of the total amounts, the Court considers that the measures taken by the national authorities to pay the amounts due in several installments struck a fair balance between the applicants’ rights to see their judgments enforced within a reasonable time and the public interest at stake (see Dumitru and Others v. Romania (dec.), no. 57265/08, §§ 45-52, 4 September 2012).
6. In applications nos. 21696/16 and 58222/16, the Court notes that the judgments in question were enforced within periods not exceeding 1 year and 3 months. Taking into account the complexity of the enforcement proceedings, the conduct of the applicants as well as the conduct of the authorities, the Court notes that the periods in question are not so excessive as to raise an arguable claim under the Convention (see, for example, Şerbănescu v. Romania (dec.), no. 43638/10, §§ 9-10, 1 December 2016).
7. In respect of application no. 52066/16 the Court observes that the state was ordered to launch a public tender with regard to a company which was under insolvency proceedings; something that is not possible according to domestic legislation. The Court therefore notes the existence of an objective impossibility to enforce the judgment.
8. In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Declares the applications inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 4 October 2018.
Liv TigerstedtGeorges Ravarani
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of the Protocol No. 1
(non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic judgments)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Date of birth / Date of registration
Relevant domestic judgment
Start date of non-enforcement period
End date of non-enforcement period
Length of enforcement proceedings
21226/16
08/04/2016
Marius-Constantin Agafiței
20/03/1975
Neamț County Court,
21/02/2012
13/07/2012
08/10/2015
3 years and 2 months and 26 days
21696/16
14/04/2016
Ion Iosif
19/07/1963
represented by Călin Ovidiu Pîrjan,
a lawyer practising in Constanța
High Court of Cassation and Justice,
14/10/2015
14/10/2015
15/12/2016
1 year and 2 months and 2 days
52066/16
26/08/2016
S.C. Concept LTD S.R.L.
31/01/1992
represented by Gheorghe Eduard Manole
Alba Iulia Court of Appeal, 05/10/2005
05/10/2005
pending
More than 12 years and 8 months and 23 days
55403/16
16/09/2016
S.C. Termosystem Services TSS S.R.L.
09/01/2003
represented by Florentina Tatiana Bratu,
a lawyer practising in Constanța
Constanța County Court,
25/02/2015
04/11/2015
pending
More than 2 years and 7 months and 24 days
58222/16
28/09/2016
Theodor-Iulian Lădar
15/10/1979
Cristina-Andreea Lădar
17/11/1976
represented by Andrei Sorin Munteanu,
a lawyer practising in Constanța
Constanța Court of Appeal, 09/09/2015
15/03/2016
29/06/2017
1 year and 3 months and 15 days
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy