Resolution ResDH(2006)3
concerning the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
in the case of Kutić and eighteen other cases against Croatia (see Appendix I)
relating to the lack of access to a court
in civil proceedings stayed automatically by a provision of law
and the excessive length of civil proceedings
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 February 2006,
at the 955th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Kutić and seventeen other cases (see details in Appendix I) transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once they had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the cases originated in applications lodged against Croatia (see details in Appendix I) and that the European Court of Human Rights declared admissible the applicants' complaints relating to the lack of access to a court due to legislation of 1996 and 1999 staying all civil proceedings concerning claims for damages in respect of terrorist acts or caused by the members of the Croatian army or police in the context of the Homeland War in Croatia and, in the Čuljak and others case, the complaint relating to the excessive length of certain civil proceedings, including one set of proceedings stayed under the above-mentioned legislation;
Recalling that the European Court subsequently held in all these cases that there had been violations of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention in respect of the applicants’ right of access to a court and that, in the case of Čuljak and others, there had also been violations of that provision on account of the excessive length of certain civil proceedings, and awarded them sums in just satisfaction (see Appendix I);
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the European Court’s judgments, having regard to Croatia’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it;
Having satisfied itself that the Government of Croatia paid all the applicants the sums awarded by the European Court as just satisfaction (see details in Appendix I);
Having noted the individual measures taken by the authorities to grant the applicants redress for the violations found (restitutio in integrum), in particular by accelerating as far as possible those proceedings which were still pending after the finding of violations by the Court (see details in Appendix II);
Whereas during the examination of these cases by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state gave the Committee information about the measures taken to prevent new violations of the same kind as those found in the present judgments which relate to the lack of access to a court (this information appears in the Appendix II to this resolution);
Having noted that general measures had already been taken by the respondent state to prevent new violations related to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see Final Resolution DH(2005)60 in the case of Horvat against Croatia), principally through the adoption on 14 July 2003 of an Act amending the Code of Civil Procedure, which aims particularly at strengthening procedural discipline and accelerating civil proceedings and by introducing an effective remedy against the excessive length of judicial proceedings (new Article 63 of the Constitutional Court Act, in force since 15 March 2002),
Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of Croatia, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases.
Appendix I to Resolution ResDH(2006)3
Details of the just satisfaction awarded to the applicants
Cases
Date of judgment
Judgment final on
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Payment on
Kutić Vojin and Kutić Ana 48778/99
01/03/2002
01/06/2002
10,000 euros
-
15/07/2002
Multiplex
58112/00
10/07/2003
10/10/2003
4,000 euros
500 euros
27/11/2003
Aćimović Ljubomir
61237/00
09/10/2003
09/01/2004
4,000 euros
-
02/02/2004
Crnojević Milan
71614/01
21/10/2004
30/03/2005
4,000 euros
2,000 euros
15/06/2005
Čuljak Gojko, Čuljak Branko and Mesoprodukt 58115/00
19/12/2002
19/03/2003
4,500 euros to the first and second applicants each
2,000 euros
17/04/2003
Dragičević Ljuban
11814/02
09/12/2004
09/03/2003
4,000 euros
400 euros
21/03/2005
Dragović Ranko and Dragović Ružica
5705/02
28/10/2004
28/01/2005
4,000 euros to the first applicant and 5,000 euros to the second applicant
-
24/03/2005
Freimann Anica
5266/02
24/06/2004
24/09/2004
-
-
-
Kastelic Tomaž
60533/00
10/07/2003
10/10/2003
4,000 euros
2,000 euros
20/11/2003
Kljajić Mirko
22681/02
17/03/2005
17/06/2005
3,500 euros
500 euros
25/08/2005
Lulić Branka and Becker Martina
22857/02
24/03/2005
24/06/2005
8,000 euros jointly
-
29/08/2005
Marinković Mile and Marinković Milena
9138/02
21/10/2004
21/01/2005
8,000 euros
500 euros
18/03/2005
Mihajlović Nevenka and Milorad
21752/02
07/07/2005
01/10/2005
7,000 euros
1,500 euros
18/11/2005
Cases
Date of judgment
Judgment final on
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Payment on
Peić Ivan
16787/02
26/05/2005
26/08/2005
4,000 euros
500 euros
06/09/2005
Pikić Lazo
16552/02
18/01/2005
18/04/2005
4,000 euros
-
09/05/2005
Urukalo Stojan and Nemet Verica
26886/02
28/04/2005
28/07/2005
8,000 euros jointly
500 euros jointly
16/06/2005
Varićak Marica
78008/01
21/10/2004
21/01/2005
4,000 euros
2,000 euros
21/03/2005
Zadro Nevenka
25410/02
26/05/2005
26/08/2005
1,000 euros
750 euros
16/11/2005
Zovanović Vinko
12877/02
09/12/2004
09/03/2005
4,000 euros
400 euros
21/03/2005
Appendix II to Resolution ResDH(2006)3
Information provided by the Government of Croatia
during the examination by the Committee of Ministers
of the Kutić case and eighteen other cases
concerning the lack of access to a court
in civil proceedings stayed automatically by a provision of law
and the excessive length of civil proceedings
I. As regards individual measures
In all these cases the domestic proceedings stayed in accordance with the legislation of 1996 and 1999 have resumed pursuant to the law adopted on 14 July 2003 by the Croatian Parliament (see below).
Furthermore, on 16 October 2003, the Supreme Court adopted a resolution (No. Su-937-IV/03) instructing the competent courts to continue all civil proceedings stayed in accordance of the law of 1996 and 1999 ex officio, without a specific request from the parties. In addition, the President of the Supreme Court and presidents of all County Courts and Municipal Courts in Croatia were urged by the Ministry of Justice (letter of 22 April 2005) to display special diligence in the conduct of the proceedings concerning these cases, in order to speed them up and to erase, as far as possible, the consequences for the applicants of the violations found by the European Court.
As regards civil proceedings relating to the Čuljak and others case, which are still pending at national level, the competent court’s attention was drawn to the European Court's findings with a view to accelerating the proceedings as far as possible. The conduct of proceedings in this case is being supervised.
II. As regards general measures
1) Legislative measures providing for the resumption of the stayed proceedings
On 14 July 2003 the Croatian Parliament adopted the Act on the Responsibility of the Republic of Croatia for Damage caused by Members of the Croatian Army and Police during the Homeland War and the Act on the Responsibility of the Republic of Croatia for Damages resulting from Terrorist Acts and Public Demonstrations (Official Gazette No. 117 of 23 July 2003). These laws provided the resumption of civil proceedings which had been stayed in accordance with the law of 1996 and 1999.
2) Development in the Constitutional Court’s case-law creating a new domestic remedy for alleged violations of the right of access to a court
On 24 March 2004 the Constitutional Court gave a decision No. U-III-829/2004 in the case of a person who had filed a constitutional complaint under section 63 of the 2002 Constitutional Court Act complaining about the length of certain proceedings and of lack of access to a court because his action in the domestic courts had been stayed by statute for an extended period.
In its decision, the Constitutional Court held that there had been a violation of the constitutional rights to a trial within a reasonable time and to access to a court. It ordered the court concerned to give a decision in the case within one year and awarded the plaintiff compensation.
Having regard to this development in the Constitutional Court’s case-law, the European Court has already accepted in the case of Pikić against Croatia (see details in Appendix I) that the complaint under Section 63 of the 2002 Constitutional Court Act may be considered an effective remedy in respect of complaints concerning the lack of access to a court.
3) Publication and dissemination of the judgments
The judgment of the European Court in the case of Kutić was translated and published on the official Internet site of the government (/dokumenti.html), in the Collected Papers of the Zagreb Law School (issue No. 2/2003) and in the journal The Informer (issue No. 5022/2002). Moreover, it has been sent out to the courts of the country. The judgment of the European Court in the case of Multiplex was published in the journal The Informer (issue No. 5176/2003). The judgment in the Aćimović case was published on the official Internet site of the government, on the Internet site of the Supreme Court () and in the journal The Informer (issue No. 5195/2003). A copy of the judgment has been sent to the courts directly concerned, to the Constitutional Court, to the Supreme Court, to the Parliament (various committees) and to the Legislation Committee of the government. Moreover, the President of the Supreme Court was asked to inform all judges of the content of the judgment.
III. Conclusion
The government believes that the measures taken make it possible first, to erase as far as possible the consequences of the violations found in the present cases and secondly, to prevent new, similar violations of the right to access to a court. The government therefore considers that Croatia has fulfilled its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention with regard to the present judgments.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy