THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 18175/12
Nikolla CEPIKU and SENI SH.P.K.
against Albania
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 9 November 2023 as a Committee composed of:
Ioannis Ktistakis, President,
Darian Pavli,
Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 March 2012,
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants were represented by Ms A. Mascia, a lawyer practising in Verona.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings and lack of effective remedy were communicated to the Albanian Government (“the Government”).
THE LAWAs regards the first applicant, Mr Cepiku
After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by the above complaints.
The Government acknowledged the excessive length of civil proceedings in respect of the first applicant. They further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the first applicant’s rights guaranteed by Article 13 of the Convention. They offered to pay the first applicant the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.
The first applicant was sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declaration several weeks before the date of this decision. On 7 March 2023 the Court received a response by which the first applicant rejected the terms of the declaration.
The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:
“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.
Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the case to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75‑77, ECHR 2003-VI).
The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Luli and Others v. Albania, nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, 1 April 2014, and Mishgjoni v. Albania, no. 18381/05, 7 December 2010).
Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declaration as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application in the part brought by the first applicant (Article 37 § 1 (c)).
In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the respective part of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine).
Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the application may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (see Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike out the complaints concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings and lack of effective remedies as regards the first applicant, Mr Cepiku.As regards the applicant company
The applicant company also raised similar complaints under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention.
The Court has examined the application and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declaration in so far as they concern the first applicant, Mr Cepiku, and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;
Decides to strike this part of the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention;
Declares the remainder of the application inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 30 November 2023.
Viktoriya Maradudina Ioannis Ktistakis
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention
(excessive length of civil proceedings and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in that regard)
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth /
Year of registration
Representative ‘s name and location
Date of receipt of Government’s declaration
Date of receipt of applicant’s comments
Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage
to the first applicant under the unilateral declaration
(in euros)[1]
Amount awarded for costs and expenses to the first applicant under the unilateral declaration
(in euros)[2]
18175/12
07/03/2012
Nikolla CEPIKU
1954
SENI SH.P.K.
1995
Mascia Antonella
Verona
30/01/2023
07/03/2023
1,200
250
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant
[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy