Information Note on the Court’s case-law 206
April 2017
Knežević and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.) - 15663/12
Decision 14.3.2017 [Section V]
Article 37
Article 37-1
Striking out applications
Settlement plan for paying war damages implemented general measures indicated: struck out
Facts – In 2009 in Čolić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, the European Court held that the failure to comply with final domestic judgments awarding war damages had breached Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and, in view of the large number of other similar cases, invited the respondent State to take general measures to solve the problem.
In 2012 the Republika Srpska introduced a settlement plan which envisaged the enforcement of final judgments ordering payment of war damages within thirteen years of 2013 and the payment of EUR 50 in respect of non-pecuniary damage. In 2013 the enforcement time frame was extended to twenty years. In 2015 in Đurić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina the European Court examined the adequacy of the 2012 settlement plan and considered the proposed time frame of twenty years to be too long in the light of the lengthy delays which had already occurred. The Court indicated, inter alia, that the respondent State should amend the settlement plan and a more appropriate enforcement interval should be introduced, such as that initially adopted in 2012.
In the Convention proceedings the applicants complained about the non-enforcement of the final domestic judgment awarding them war damages.
Law – Article 37: A new settlement plan of 15 September 2016 provided for the enforcement of final judgments within thirteen years of 2016. The Court considered that the respondent State had implemented the general measures indicated in Đurić and Others in conformity with the Convention. That was also the opinion of the Committee of Ministers, which had considered the revised settlement plan to provide a global solution to the problem of non-enforcement of domestic court decisions relating to war damages.
The final judgment in the applicants’ favour would be enforced in accordance with the new settlement plan and they would also receive compensation for non-pecuniary damage suffered on account of delayed enforcement. In view of that, the Court concluded that the matter had been resolved for the purposes of Article 37 § 1 (b) and found that further examination of the application was no longer justified. There were no special circumstances which required the continued examination of the case.
Conclusion: struck out.
(See Čolić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1218/07 et al., 10 November 2009; and Đurić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, 79867/12 et al., 20 January 2015, Information Note 181)
© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.
Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy