Communicated on 23 May 2019
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 50741/15
Valeriu PAHOMII
against the Republic of Moldova
lodged on 8 October 2015
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the applicant’s sanctioning for erecting a building without authorisation, allegedly after the expiry of the limitation period and the application of a complementary sanction which was allegedly inapplicable to the applicant. It raises issues under Articles 6 and 7.
QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES
1. Do the facts of the case disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the courts examine the case against the applicant despite the expiry of the limitation period for sanctioning him (see, mutatis mutandis, Ghirea v. Moldova, no. 15778/05, §§ 30-36, 26 June 2012)? Was the law concerning the limitation period and the notion of “continuous offenses” in the Administrative Code foreseeable in its application?
2. Has there been a violation of Article 7 of the Convention in the present case? In particular, could the complementary sanction in Article 179 of the Contraventions Code (demolition of non-authorised buildings) be lawfully applied to the applicant (see, for instance, Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC], no. 21906/04, § 138, ECHR 2008)? Was the law applied to convict the applicant foreseeable in its application, notably regarding the complementary sanction mentioned above (see Kafkaris, cited above, § 140)?
3. Has there been a breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, was the interference with the applicant’s property right “lawful” within the meaning of that provision? (see, for instance, Bimer S.A. v. Moldova, no. 15084/03, §§ 49-60, 10 July 2007)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy