Published on 23 May 2022
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 18207/14
LEGAL TUR S.R.L.
against the Republic of Moldova
lodged on 20 February 2014
communicated on 3 May 2022
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns legal certainty and reasons for judgments, as well as protection of property.
In 1994 the applicant company concluded a contract whereby it bought a building from another company (I.). Since at the time there was no Cadastre institution and no requirement of registering buildings with such an institution, the building was not registered on the applicant company’s name. It subsequently obtained a final judgment (2011) which confirmed the validity of the 1994 contract.
In the meantime, the building was registered in the name of the local public administration (LPA). The applicant company’s court action to annul the registration of the building in LPA’s name was rejected. The Supreme Court of Justice found that contracts for the sale of buildings had to be registered with the relevant authority and no such registration had taken place in the present case. In such circumstances, the contract was void. In adopting its decision, the Supreme Court of Justice did not comment on the lower court’s finding that in 1994 the law did not provide for such special registration and that the validity of the 1994 contract, being established in the final 2011 judgment, was res judicata.
The applicant company complains of a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as a result of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice, which effectively nullified the effect of the final 2011 judgment concerning the validity of the 1994 contract. Moreover, that court did not give sufficient reasons, notably as regards the impossibility of retroactive application of a 1996 law to the 1994 contract.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
Has there been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the domestic courts give relevant and sufficient reasons for their judgments, notably concerning the alleged retroactive application of the law? Did the Supreme Court of Justice effectively annul the effect of a final court judgment regarding the validity of the 1994 contract, in breach of the principle of legal certainty within the meaning of that provision? (Brumărescu v. Romania [GC], no. 28342/95, ECHR 1999‑VII)