RUCI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 56937/10
RUCI and BEJLERI against Albania
and 191 other applications
(see list appended)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 20 April 2021 as a Committee composed of:

Dmitry Dedov, President,
Darian Pavli,
Peeter Roosma, judges,
and Olga Chernishova, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended tables,

Having regard to the pilot judgment delivered in the case of Manushaqe Puto and Others v. Albania, nos. 604/07 and 3 others, 31 July 2012

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

1.  A detailed list of the applicants, including their representatives and the date of introduction of each application, has been set out in the tables appended to this decision (“the Appendix”).Background to the case

2.  In 2012 the Court delivered a pilot judgment in respect of Albania finding a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as well as of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the authorities’ prolonged non‑enforcement of final decisions awarding compensation in lieu of restitution of property expropriated by the former communist regime, and a breach of Article 13 of the Convention owing to the lack of an effective domestic remedy in that regard (see Manushaqe Puto and Others v. Albania, nos. 604/07 and 3 others, 31 July 2012).

3.  Further to the implementation of the Manushaqe Puto and Others pilot judgment, on 5 December 2015 the Albanian Parliament adopted the Treatment of Property and Finalisation of the Property Compensation Process Act (“the 2015 Property Act”), which introduced a new remedy for securing the enforcement of the right to compensation. According to the new remedy, for the purpose of enforcement, all final decisions which had recognised the right to compensation, without determining the amount of compensation, would be subject to a financial evaluation. It would be carried out by the Agency for Treatment of Property (the “ATP”) which had been established by the 2015 Property Act. The ATP would determine the value of the financial evaluation on the basis of the cadastral category of the property at the time of expropriation. Property valuation maps comprising the names of administrative units, cadastral zones, cadastral category and respective price per square meter were subsequently adopted.

Unenforced final decisions which had determined the amount of compensation would be enforced in full, subject to indexation.

4.  On 17 March 2020 the Court delivered a landmark decision in the case of Beshiri and Others v. Albania ((dec.), no. 29026/06 and 11 other applications), in which it found that, subject to, amongst other things, the amount of the compensation being no less than 10% of the value to which former owners would be entitled if the financial evaluation was to be carried out by reference to the current cadastral category of the expropriated property, the domestic remedy introduced by virtue of the 2015 Property Act was effective (ibid., § 196).The circumstances of the case

5.  The present applications were lodged with the Court between 2010 and 2015 and concern the prolonged non-enforcement of final decisions recognising the applicants’ right to compensation in one of the ways provided for by law in lieu of the restitution of their properties which had been expropriated by the former communist regime. They raise issues similar to those examined by the Court in the Manushaqe Puto and Others pilot judgment, cited above.

6.  Details of the final decisions and enforcement thereof, which have been updated in view of the information provided by most of the applicants, have been summarily set out in the Appendix.Relevant domestic law and practiceThe 2015 Property Act

7.  The 2015 Property Act was described in details in the Beshiri and Others decision, cited above, §§ 30-62. As stated in that decision, by way of in abstracto constitutional review, in January 2017 the Constitutional Court endorsed the new compensation scheme introduced by sections 6 (1) and (2) of the 2015 Property Act. It did not reach the required number of votes to decide on the calculation of the financial evaluation provided for in section 7 and, consequently, decided to dismiss that part of the complaint without prejudice (vendosi refuzimin e kërkesës). The operative provisions of the decision stated that the Constitutional Court decided to reject the request about repealing section 6 (1) (b) and section 7 (2) (a) and (b) (vendosi refuzimin e kërkesës për shfuqizimin e nenit 6, pika 1, shkronja “b”, si dhe të nenit 7, pika 2, shkronja “a” dhe “b”). However, it decided to strike down sections 6 (3) and (5) of the 2015 Property Act stating that (as reproduced from the Beshiri and Others decision, cited above):

“70.   ... [those] provisions ‘were conceived as new expropriation since they envisaged a re-evaluation of properties that had already been restored to [former] owners or for which they had already received compensation’. It was for this reason that they gave rise to issues concerning a breach of the principle of legal certainty, especially as regards the lack of clarity and foreseeability. The Constitutional Court stated that ‘the legislator should consider the extent to which compensation in kind provided for in [the repealed] sections 6 §§ 3 and 5 is supplemented by other provisions in order to avoid any overlapping or contradiction between legal provisions’”.

8.  Notwithstanding the Constitutional Court’s decision, on 7 December 2017 a fresh request for in abstracto constitutional review of sections 6 (1) (b) and 7 (2) (a) and (b) of the 2015 Property Act as well as of certain provisions of implementing decisions adopted by the Government was lodged with the Constitutional Court by an association of former owners (see, also, Beshiri and Others, cited above, §§ 73, 81 and 89).Domestic case-law subsequent to the Court’s decision in Beshiri and Others

(a)   Constitutional Court’s case-law

9.  In response to the second request for the constitutional review of certain provisions of the 2015 Property Act and its implementing decisions (see paragraph 8 above), in decision no. 4 of 15 February 2021 the Constitutional Court held that, in so far as it had not examined the merits of the complaints concerning sections 6 (1) (b) and 7 (2) (a) and (b) of the 2015 Property Act and it had not taken a final decision regarding their compatibility with the constitutional provisions and the Convention in 2017, the principle of res judicata did not apply to its prior findings in respect of such complaints and, consequently, it was not prevented from examining the merits of those complaints.

10.  The Constitutional Court recalled that section 6 (1) and (2) embodied the main principles of the compensation formula (otherwise referred to as the financial evaluation in the 2015 Property Act). The provision of section 6 (1) (b) was a constituent element of the compensation formula provided in section 6 and regulated the evaluation of the property which had been restored. The remaining provisions of section 6 governed other situations relating to the application of the compensation formula (that is, the financial evaluation). It therefore concluded that the repeal of sections 6 (3) and (5) did not affect the application of section 6 (1) (b) and dismissed that part of the complaint.

11.  As regards section 7 (2), the Constitutional Court stated that the provisions of section 7 (2) (a) and (b) regulated instances where a former owner had obtained prior partial restoration of the expropriated property. The Constitutional Court noted that, based on updated information provided by the Government, a sizeable number of decisions, namely 10,120 out of 26,091, which had been subject to financial evaluation, were affected by a change of the cadastral category over time. Consequently, it was for the legislature - and not the executive branch of the State - to determine how the 10% minimum threshold for the amount of compensation that this Court had directed in the Beshiri and Others decision was to be applied to that category, including to cases where former owners had obtained some prior partial restoration. It was for this reason that the Constitutional Court found that the method of calculation contained in section 7 (2) (a) and (b), which had not been amended following the Court’s decision in Beshiri and Others, did not comply with the 10% minimum threshold, and concluded that the interference with the former owners’ right to property was disproportionate. It therefore decided to repeal section 7 (2) (a) and (b) of the 2015 Property Act. The Constitutional Court deferred the entry into force of its decision by six months and directed the legislature to enact new legislation, within the same period, to fill the legal vacuum in the 2015 Property Act arising from the repealed provisions.

12.  The Constitutional Court further repealed certain provisions of implementing decisions adopted by the Government, since, by virtue of the 2015 Property Act, the legislature had not delegated to the Government the authority to determine a priority order of compensation forms or a combination of different compensation forms.

(b)   Supreme Court’s case-law

13.  From 15 May to 8 June 2020 the administrative bench of the Supreme Court delivered a number of decisions concerning applications for the stay of enforcement of domestic courts’ decisions given in cases relating to the financial evaluation carried out by the ATP, namely decisions no. 210 of 15 May 2020, no. 122/462 of 1 June 2020, nos. 45/327 and 56/348 of 8 June 2020.

14.  The Supreme Court’s administrative bench held that an application for the stay of enforcement of decisions given by the Administrative Court of Appeal would be granted on the condition that, amongst others, the impugned decisions were final. In those cases, in so far as the Administrative Court of Appeal had examined actions against the ATP decisions on financial evaluation as a first-instance court and given that an appeal against the Administrative Court of Appeal decisions had been lodged with the Supreme Court and was pending before it, the application for the stay of enforcement was rejected on the ground that the Administrative Court of Appeal decisions had not become final. The Administrative Court of Appeal decisions had annulled the financial evaluation carried out by the ATP and enjoined the ATP either to carry out a fresh financial evaluation or to award the payment of a specific sum of money as financial compensation.

COMPLAINTS

15.  Almost all applicants complained that there was a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, and most of the applicants complained that there was a breach of Article 13 of the Convention, on account of the authorities’ non‑enforcement of final decisions which had recognised their right to receive compensation in lieu of the restitution of properties.

THE LAW

16.  The Court notes that the applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 13 of the Convention, which, in so far as relevant, read as follows:

Article 6 – Right to a fair trial

“1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by [a] ... tribunal ...”

Article 13 – Right to an effective remedy

“Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in [the] Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.”

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 – Protection of property

“Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.

The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties.”Joinder of the applications

17.  The Court, having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court.The complaint under Article 13 of the Convention as well as the complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the ConventionAs regards decision no. 651 of 31 October 1994 in respect of application no. 24086/15, application no. 41685/15 and decisions nos. 210 of 7 July 1995 and 210 of 26 February 2008 in respect of application no. 56491/15

18.  As regards decision no. 651 of 31 October 1994 given in respect of application no. 24086/15 (see row no. 15 of the Appendix), application no. 41685/15 (see row no. 43 of the Appendix), as well as decisions nos. 210 of 7 July 1995 and 210 of 26 February 2008 given in respect of application no. 56491/15 (see row no. 61 in the Appendix), the Court takes note of the applicants’ wish to withdraw their complaints. In these circumstances, the Court concludes that the applicants do not intend to pursue their complaints in respect of the concerned decisions, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, and it finds no reasons of general interest concerning respect for human rights, within the meaning of the final sentence of Article 37 § 1, which would require the continued examination of those complaints.

19.  It follows that, in so far as the complaints concerning decision no. 651 of 31 October 1994 given in respect of application no. 24086/15, decisions nos. 210 of 7 July 1995 and 210 of 26 February 2008 given in respect of application no. 56491/15 are concerned, that part of the application should be struck out of the Court’s list of cases. As regards application no. 41685/15, it should be struck out of the Court’s list of cases.As regards the remainder of the applications

20.  At the outset, the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine the legal standing of the applicants or heirs, their shares of inherited properties or their right to compensation or any factual discrepancies in respect of domestic decisions, as the applications are in any event inadmissible for the following reasons.

21.  The Court recalls that, as a part of implementation of the Manushaqe Puto and Others pilot judgment, the authorities introduced a domestic remedy by adopting the 2015 Property Act (see paragraph 3 above). The Court examined this domestic remedy in the Beshiri and Others decision and found that, on the basis of the available information at the material time, that remedy was effective, within the meaning of Article 35 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention (see paragraph 4 above).

22.  The Court notes that, subsequent to the delivery of the Beshiri and Others decision, on 15 February 2021 the Constitutional Court delivered a decision in response to another request for in abstracto constitutional review of certain provisions of the 2015 Property Act, repealing its section 7 (2) (a) and (b) and certain provisions of implementing decisions. The Court considers that the Constitutional Court’s findings do not warrant a departure from its findings that the new compensation remedy still remains an effective remedy, within the meaning of Article 35 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention, for the reasons given below.

23.  The Court notes that the Constitutional Court reconfirmed the core features of the compensation scheme, as stated in section 6 of the 2015 Property Act. It did not question the reference to the original cadastral category of the expropriated property as the main basis for carrying out the financial evaluation.

24.  The Court is satisfied that, in deciding to repeal section 7 (2) (a) and (b) of the 2015 Property Act which regulated the determination of financial evaluation when a former owner had obtained prior partial restoration of the expropriated property, the Constitutional Court acted consistently with and, indeed, sought to give effect to the Court’s direction that the amount of compensation should not be less than 10% of the value to which former owners would be entitled if the financial evaluation was carried out by reference to the current cadastral category of the expropriated property (see Beshiri and Others, cited above, § 196). Furthermore, the Constitutional Court directed the legislature to replace the repealed provisions within a period of six months.

25.  The Court does not consider that the repeal of applicable provisions in the implementing decisions adopted by the Government raises any novel issues. It has already stated in the Beshiri and Others decision, amongst other things, that it was not its task “to determine the hierarchy of compensation forms to be awarded by the domestic authorities”, and that the domestic legal framework “ought to describe and circumscribe with sufficient clarity the exercise of discretion by the ATP - or other implementing authorities - in making decisions relating to the award of compensation” (ibid., §§ 179 and 180). The Court further recalls that, in view of the considerable burden on the State budget which financial compensation represented, it urged the respondent State in the Manushaqe Puto and Others pilot judgment, “as a matter of priority, to start making use of other alternative forms of compensation, which would eventually ease pressure on the budget, and/or to introduce other methods of compensation” (ibid., § 113).

26.  The Court finds that, in view of the reasons described above, namely the reconfirmation of the main features of the compensation scheme, the endorsement of the amount of compensation to be awarded to former owners in line with the direction made in the Beshiri and Others decision and the statutory stipulation for various forms of compensation, no issues affect the effectiveness of the remedy provided for by the 2015 Property Act as such, which continues to remain accessible and efficient to all former owners and provides for an appropriate form of redress. The deferred entry into force of the Constitutional Court’s decision will allow the authorities, in particular the legislature, to pass legislation which would ensure compliance with the Court’s Beshiri and Others decision and maintain the effectiveness of the remedy provided for by the 2015 Property Act. The Court therefore considers that the applicants’ complaint under Article 13 of the Convention (see paragraph 15 above) is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention (see, also, Beshiri and Others, cited above, § 221).

27.  As regards the applicants’ remaining complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see paragraph 15 above), the Court observes that, depending on the actual stage of the proceedings in respect of each application, the following situations can be distinguished.

28.  In the first place, as regards decision no. 110 of 29 June 1995 given in respect of application no. 30046/15 (see row no. 29 of the Appendix), no. 241 of 12 September 1995 given in respect of application 161/17 (see row no. 121 of the Appendix), no. 67 of 6 April 2006 given in respect of application no. 35959/17 (see row no. 126 of the Appendix), as well as all applications described in Table 2 (rows nos. 157-92 of the Appendix), the Court observes that the domestic proceedings concerning the determination of the compensation amount are pending before the national courts. It considers therefore that it would be premature for it to deal with these complaints, which must be rejected under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention (see Beshiri and Others, cited above, § 219). The subsequent Supreme Court’s case-law further confirms that, where an appeal has been filed with the highest court, the lower courts’ decisions would become final and enforceable upon the delivery of a decision by the Supreme Court (see paragraphs 13 and 14 above).

29.  Secondly, the Court notes that, in so far as application nos. 43859/13 and 18669/16 are concerned (see rows nos. 5 and 97 of the Appendix), the domestic authorities did not recognise by means of a final decision the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of which it cannot be said that they have a “legitimate expectation” to receive compensation, and thus a “possession” for the purposes of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see Kopecký v. Slovakia [GC], no. 44912/98, § 49, ECHR 2004‑IX; and Gratzinger and Gratzingerova v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 39794/98, § 73, ECHR 2002‑VII). As regards application no. 18669/16, the applicants have not provided any updated information that they have lodged a fresh property claim in accordance with the 2015 Property Act seeking the recognition of their right to compensation. It follows that the complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 is incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention. Consequently, the complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the non-enforcement of such domestic decisions is manifestly ill‑founded and should be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

30.  Thirdly, in so far as the applicants in applications nos. 11666/20 and 22859/20 (see rows nos. 186 and 155 of the Appendix) claimed that the court decisions acknowledging the existence of a legal fact gave rise to a “possession” within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, the Court considers that this complaint is incompatible ratione materiae within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 as those court decisions did not confer on the applicants property rights or any other rights whatsoever (see Bici v. Albania, no. 5250/07, §§ 46-52, 3 December 2015, and, mutatis mutandis, Marku v. Albania, no. 54710/12, § 37, 15 July 2014). This complaint must thus be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention. Consequently, any complaint about the non-enforcement of such domestic decisions brought under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention is manifestly ill-founded and should be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

31.  Lastly, the Court finds that, regardless of the applications’ date of introduction, the remaining applications found in the Appendix, save for specific individual decisions given in respect of the applications which have been examined separately in paragraphs 18-19 and 28-30 above, were or are required under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention to avail themselves of the new domestic remedy introduced by virtue of the 2015 Property Act in compliance with the relevant domestic rules. The applicants have either failed to exhaust domestic remedies or failed to inform the Court of any action they have taken in this regard. This equally applies to those cases in which the ATP did not carry out a financial evaluation due to the lack of required documentation or on account of other reasons, or to those cases in which the ATP decided that the applicants were deemed to have been fully compensated, in respect of which the applicants were similarly required to follow the relevant domestic procedures. The Court finds no exceptional circumstances capable of exempting the applicants from the obligation to exhaust domestic remedies (see Beshiri and Others, cited above, §§ 216‑18). It follows that these complaints must be rejected under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies.

32.  Notwithstanding the above conclusion, the Court recalls the stipulations made in paragraph 222 of the decision Beshiri and Others, cited above, regarding the conditions which the authorities ought to satisfy in order for the remedy to continue to remain effective, in particular the award of compensation of no less than 10% of the value to which former owners would be entitled if the financial evaluation was carried out by reference to the current cadastral category of the expropriated property.Other alleged violations of the Convention

33.  In so far as the applicants in application no. 18669/16 (see row no. 97 of the Appendix) appear to complain about an alleged unfairness of domestic court proceedings, the Court notes that, on the basis of the material in the case file, the last domestic decision was given by the Supreme Court on 26 February 2013, more than six months before the date of the introduction of the application on 31 March 2016. It follows that this complaint under Article 6 § 1 is out of time and must be declared inadmissible in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

34.  Having regard to all the material in its possession, and in so far as the complaints fall within its competence, the Court finds that the complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the alleged unfairness of domestic court proceedings in respect of applications nos. 7645/16, 9833/16 and 14390/16 (see rows nos. 86, 89 and 95) and the complaints under Article 14 of the Convention in respect of applications nos. 21990/16, 24962/16, 27133/17 and 32114/17 (see rows nos. 98, 172, 177 and 178 of the Appendix) do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols. It follows that this part of the application must be rejected as manifestly ill founded, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Decides to strike out of its list of cases the complaints concerning decision no. 651 of 31 October 1994 given in respect of application no. 24086/15, decisions nos. 210 of 7 July 1995 and 210 of 26 February 2008 given in respect of application no. 56491/15, and application no. 41685/15;

Declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 3 June 2021.

{signature_p_1} {signature_p_2}

{Olga ChernishovaDmitry Dedov
Deputy RegistrarPresident

APPENDIX

Table 1

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Article

Description of final domestic decisions

Enforcement details

Represented by

1.  

56937/10

Lodged on

21/07/2010

Gani RUÇI

Fazilete BEJLERI (née RUÇI)

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1007 of 21 April 2003 the Gjirokastër Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 40,000 sq. m which would be compensated by means of State bonds in the amount of 976,000 Albanian leks (“ALL” – approx. 7,776 euros “EUR”).

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Artan Hajdari

2.  

60985/12

Lodged on

17/09/2012

Zamira MARKU

Article 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 742 of 4 March 1996 the Tirana Commission, supplementing its decision no. 400 of 2 October 1995, recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 69,400 sq. m, of which 5,000 sq. m which was occupied by unlawfully constructed buildings were restored, 5,000 sq. m would be compensated in kind and the remaining 59,400 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Spiro Dodbiba

3.  

80562/12

Lodged on

28/11/2012

Ismail REKA

Tahire DAJA[1]

Lirije LACEJ

Njazi REKA

Arben BARONI

Zana HARXHI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1557 of 30 September 2003 the Supreme Court, modifying the Tirana Commission decision no. 549 of 3 May 1996, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 6,870 sq. m.

The Agency for Treatment of Property (“ATP”) has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants have not taken any action concerning the enforcement of the ATP’s decision on the financial evaluation.

Viktor Gumi

4.  

80606/12

Lodged on

28/11/2012

Mustafa VOKOPOLA

Fatbardha VOKOPOLA

Ferit VOKOPOLA

Neire VOKOPOLA

Nafize VOKOPOLA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 856 of 20 September 2008 the Fier Agency, which had replaced the Commission, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 97,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Artur Hajdari

5.  

43859/13

Lodged on

01/07/2013

Ibrahim DAKLI

Endri KOTHERJA

Ruzhdije DAKLI

Drita DAKLI

Sami DAKLI

Shpresa DAKLI

Valentina DAKLI

Besa DAKLI

Bardhul DAKLI

Lauresha DAKLI

Elona DAKLI

Rukiela DAKLI

Artan KURTI

Silvana DRACINI

Mirela DRACINI

Minerva KOTHERJA

Hysni KOTHERJA

Hyqmet KOTHERJA[2]

Pranvera KARAPICI

Zana SHAMI

Sabire GABECI

Engjell DAKLI

Arjana DAKLI

Naim DAKLI

Nexhmije DAKLI

Suljan DAKLI

Eris DAKLI

Lulezim DAKLI

Arben DAKLI

Burbuqe KOTHERJA

Drita DAKLI

Article 6 § 1 and

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 135/6 of 9 February 1996 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 40,940 sq. m, of which 17,979 were restored (2,215 sq. m having been restored by means of two prior decisions given in 1994 and 1995), no right to compensation having been recognised in respect of the remaining 20,746 sq. m.

Following a civil action concerning the recognition of the applicants’ right to compensation, on 23 September 2010 the Tirana Court of Appeal accepted the civil action and ordered the Property Agency, which had by that time replaced the Commission, to decide on the applicants’ right to financial compensation in respect of 20,746 sq. m. No decision having been taken by the Property Agency, in November 2012 the applicants lodged a constitutional complaint alleging a breach of their right of access to court on account of the non-enforcement of the Tirana Court of Appeal decision. On 19 February 2013 the Constitutional Court held that “the Property Agency’s obligation to take a decision, in implementation of the Tirana Court of Appeal decision, constitutes a formal aspect of the process and not a final decision relating to the right to compensation. Consequently, the failure to adopt such a decision does not prevent the applicants from seeking the substantial right to compensation, by applying and submitting the required documents, as prescribed by the relevant legal framework”. It thus found no breach of the right of access to court as the applicants had failed to seek compensation.

In October 2015 the applicants lodged another civil action seeking an amendment to the operative provisions of the Elbasan Commission decision to the effect that they were to be awarded compensation. On 31 May 2018 the Durrës Court of Appeal decided that the applicants should be compensated in respect of 20,746 sq. m, which was occupied, in accordance with the law. A cassation appeal is pending before the Supreme Court.

In the absence of a final recognition of the right to compensation, the applicants have not applied for the award of compensation.

Endri KOTHERJA

6.  

67691/14

Lodged on

08/10/2014

Samedin KURTI

Teuta XHEMALCE (née KURTI)

Agron KURTI[3]

Ylvi KURTI

Shpëtim KURTI

Fatbardha VRAPI (née KURTI)

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 141 of 20 February 2009 the Lushnja District Court, modifying the Lushnja Commission decision no. 14 of 10 February 1995, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 16,000 sq. m, of which 4,769.75 was restored and the remaining 11,230.25 sq. m would be compensated.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of the decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Sokol Puto

7.  

10739/15

Lodged on

23/02/2015

Tomorr QOSJA

Besim QOSJA

Haxhire GARUNJA

Luiza DOSTI

Ilirjan QOSJA

Myzejen ZINXHIRIJA

Fatime DURO

Ismete KRASNIQI

Bedrije MATUSHI

Qemal KRASNIQI

Xhevahir KRASNIQI

Feridan KRASNIQI

Brikena KRASNIQI

Marsida KRASNIQI

Brunela TREBICKA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 38 of 21 March 2006 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 10,560 sq. m, of which 1,332 sq. m were restored and the remaining 9,228 sq. m would be compensated.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of the decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Sokol Puto

8.  

11526/15

Lodged on

03/02/2015

Artan BARE

Thimo BARE

Dhimiter BARE

Nikolina MUSTAFAJ

Marjana HYSENBEGASI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 34 of 10 February 2007 the Vlora Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 22,800 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Artan Hajdari

By decision no. 35 of 10 July 2007 the Vlora Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 2,400 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

9.  

11528/15

Lodged on

03/02/2015

Ahmet SHEHU

Ballkeze MEHMETI

Ahmet SHEHU

Hedije ZEKA

Afërdita SHEHU

Lutfije SHEHU

Marije SHEHU

Elis SHEHU

Aida SHEHU

Xhynejd SHEHU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 437 of 22 April 1996 the Berat Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,322 sq. m which would be compensated in kind or in State bonds.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Isuf Haxhiu

By decision no. 577 of 1 October 1996 the Berat Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 582 sq. m which would be compensated in kind or in State bonds.

By decision no. 294 of 19 April 2002 the Berat District Court, amending the Berat Commission decision no. 12 of 30 March 1999, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 905 sq. m which would be compensated in the amount of ALL 57,672,280 (approx. EUR 459,453).

10.  

11541/15

Lodged on

03/02/2015

Agron KALLAJXHI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1203 of 28 February 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 910 sq. m, of which 630 sq. m were restored, 130 sq. m would be compensated and 150 sq. m that were occupied by buildings would be compensated in kind.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Artan Hajdari

11.  

13206/15

Lodged on

13/03/2015

Vladimir SHURAJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 149 of 1 June 1999 the Përmet Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 580 sq. m, of which 198 sq. m were restored and 382 sq. m would be compensated in kind.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Oltion Toro

12.  

16525/15

Lodged on

31/03/2015

Tomor KOKOMANI

Lumturie DUDI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 353 of 17 December 2007 the Durrës Agency restored the applicants 5,826 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 63,843 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Suela Mëneri

By decision no. 646 of 20 February 2002 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 12,666 sq. m

13.  

20826/15

Lodged on

25/04/2015

Luan MUMAJESI

Isuf MUMAJESI

Besnik MUMAJESI

Petrit MUMAJESI

Arben MUMAJESI

Majlinda MUMAJESI

Fatbardha MUMAJESI (née IDRIZI)

Pullumb MUMAJESI

Enver MUMAJESI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 159 of 20 July 2007 the Property Agency, modifying the Tirana Commission decision no. 409 of 4 August 2006, restored the applicants
1,820 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of
49,770 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Avenir Peka

14.  

20833/15

Lodged on

15/04/2015

Margarita HANXHARI

Aferdita ADAMI (HANXHARI)

Laura GJOKA (HANXHARI)

Athanas HANXHARI

Vasilika LUSHI

Silvana CIKO

Jordana KOJA - VOLK

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 574 of 22 May 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 2,586 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. In 2006 the applicants received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Avenir Peka

Xhevdet Sheta

15.  

24086/15

Lodged on

14/05/2015

Siri BESHIRI

Ilmije HAMZARAJ

Anil DIZDARI

Alkion DIZDARI

Daniele BESHIRI

Patrizia BESHIRI

Cristina BESHIRI

Article 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 651 of 31 October 1994 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 10,755 sq. m, of which 3,200 sq. m were restored and 7,555 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have expressed their wish to withdraw their complaints in respect of this decision.

Sokol PUTO

By decision no. 166 of 10 July 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 159,798 sq. m, of which 120,086 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

16.  

24091/15

Lodged on

14/05/2015

Skender KËRÇIKU

Silvana TAFILICA

Ismete KËRÇIKU

Ingrid LIKA

Alban KËRÇIKU

Saimir KËRÇIKU

Adrian KËRÇIKU

Lejla POJANI

Naim KËRÇIKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 197 of 21 April 2000 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decision no. 302 of 29 March 1996, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 320,000 sq. m, of which 19,732 sq. m were restored and the remaining 300,268 sq. m would be compensated by means of State bonds in the amount of ALL 1,068,264 (approx. EUR 8,497).

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of each decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Sokol Puto

17.  

25427/15

Lodged on

20/05/2015

Milena NISHKU

Rozeta XHAGJIKA

Irena ÇELA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 616 of 9 May 2001 the Durrës District Court, modifying the Durrës Commission decision no. 469/2 of 9 February 1995, restored the applicants 152 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 3,952 sq. m. It further ordered a third party to vacate the plot measuring 152 sq. m. On 10 December 2002 the Supreme Court upheld the Durrës District Court decision.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Suela Mëneri

By decision no. 132 of 5 May 2003 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 140,000 sq. m which would be compensated in State bonds in the amount of ALL 341,600 (approx. EUR 2,723).

18.  

26340/15

Lodged on

22/05/2015

Gazmend HASEKIU

Manushaqe BEJTJA

Nimete TURHANI

Engjellushe BUMCI

Fatbardha VARDARI

Mahmut XHANI

Ajla SHISHMANI

Arben XHANI

Ibrahim HASEKIU

Ardjan HASEKIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1425 of 20 September 2005 the Elbasan District Court, modifying the Elbasan Commission decision no. 166/2 of 9 March 1994, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 10,500 sq. m, of which 7, 197 sq. m were restored and the remaining 3,303 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Altin Turhani

19.  

27960/15

Lodged on

05/06/2015

Elizana NISHKU

Milena NISHKU

Andi NISHKU

Genti NISHKU

Kostandin NISHKU

Ilir NISHKU

Artan NISHKU

Pavel NISHKU

Galina PAPA

Pranvera XHOXHI

Gjergji ÇAUSHI

Darina RESULI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 128 of 15 July 1995 the Tirana Property Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 916 sq. m, of which 804 sq. m were restored and the remaining 112 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Suela Mëneri

By decision no. 609 of 13 May 2005 the Tirana Court of Appeal, modifying the Commission decision no. 354 of 1 December 1995, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 13,310 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

20.  

28425/15

Lodged on

05/06/2015

Elizana NISHKU

Meri HOXHA

Afërdita SALLABANDA

Milena NISHKU

Andi NISHKU

Genti NISHKU

Kostandin NISHKU

Ilir NISHKU

Artan NISHKU

Pavel NISHKU

Galina PAPA

Pranvera XHOXHI

Gjergji CAUSHI

Darina RESULI

Virgjil SALLABANDA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 682 of 27 August 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 3,103.2 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Suela Mëneri

21.  

28461/15

Lodged on

05/06/2015

Iliriana TIRANA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 457 of 31 May 1994 the Shkodra Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 410 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Suela Mëneri

22.  

28791/15

Lodged on

10/06/2015

Afërdita SARAÇI

Luljana LLAGAMI[4]

Dhurata RECI

Betina XHEPA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 199 of 25 April 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 2,000 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Suela Mëneri

By decision no. 329 of 8 September 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 4,000 sq. m, of which 973 sq. m were restored and the remaining 3,027 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

By decision no. 476 of 11 February 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 9,525 sq. m, of which 3,248 sq. m were restored and the remaining 6,277 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

By decision no. 298 of 6 September 2000 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 25,000 sq. m, of which 9,412 sq. m were restored and the remaining 15,588 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

23.  

28805/15

Lodged on

11/06/2015

Bilal HYSI

Myzejen EREBARA

Fahrije HYSI

Shresa MEZINI

Venera SATA

Engjellushe EREBARA

Raimonda MULLA

Sotir BACE

Amdie BESHIRI

Ardian HYSI

Gjylso HYSI

Seit HYSI

Bitincka ADMIR

Engjellushe DILKO

Astrit DILKO

Ferdinand DILKO

Zhaneta DEMIRI

Edmond XHIHANI

Sali MINAROLLI

Isuf XHIHANI

Muhamet XHIHANI

Behije TOPULLI

Mirela SEKUJ

Fatbardha HYSI

Bardhyl HYSI

Riemer VALBONA

Ferdi XHIHANI

Artan HYSI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 62 of 11 April 2007 the Korça Agency recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 1,222,450 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

24.  

29219/15

Lodged on

12/06/2015

Sanie DAJA (ALLA)

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 416 of 26 January 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 10,000 sq. m, of which 8,350 sq. m were restored and the remaining 1,650 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Flamur Gashi

25.  

29615/15

Lodged on

15/06/2015

Bujar QIRAXHI

Shresa MEZINI

Myzejen QIRAXHI

Greta HODO

Lorenc QIRAXHI

Lida QIRAXHI

Kserdi QIRAXHI

Ediola CIFLIGU

Isida JORGJI

Silvana BARDHI

Valbona CELA

Artan CELA

Liri IDRISLLARI

Florika HOXHA

Majlinda QIRAXHI

Emirjeta QIRAXHI

Asim QIRAXHI

Dashmir QIRAXHI

Elza CANO

Latife QIRAXHI

Reshide HYSI

Ilirjan QIRAXHI

Fatbardha MINAROLLI

Admir BITINCKA

Raimonda MULLA

Skender MEKA

Sotir BACE

Amdie BESHIRI

Shpresa MEKA

Aurela MEKA

Altin MEKA

Qamil MEKA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 231 of 26 October 2007 the Korça Agency restored the applicants a plot measuring 15,675 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 82,000 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

26.  

29733/15

Lodged on

07/08/2015

Shpëtim ALIMEHMETI

Vjollca KRUTANI

Lirie PLANGARICA

Lejla LLAGAMI

Erion ALIMEHMETI

Hava ALIMEHMETI

Floralda ALIMEHMETI

Mereme LUGA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By its decision no. 2057 of 29 May 1997 the Tirana District Court, modifying the Tirana Commission decision no. 195 of 28 December 1993, restored the applicants a plot measuring 1,034 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 4,273 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

27.  

29734/15

Lodged on

07/08/2015

By decision no. 1231 of 25 February 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 18,850 sq. m, of which 4,920 sq. m were restored and the remaining 13,930 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 4,540 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

28.  

29735/15

Lodged on

07/08/2015

By decision no. 241 of 30 August 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 389.4 sq. m, of which 31.4 sq. m were restored and the remaining 358 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

29.  

30046/15

Lodged on

17/06/2015

Sabaudin BOGDANI

Dashurie BOGDANI

Lirie BALLVORA

Mejte PUPE

Rakip BOGDANI

Shpresa XAMA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 110 of 29 June 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 12,000 sq. m, of which 3,486 sq. m were restored and the remaining 8,514 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings found on the area to be compensated.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Administrative Court of Appeal.

Suela MENERI

By decision no. 613 of 14 June 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 5,400 sq. m, of which 265 sq. m were restored and the remaining 5,135 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

There is no information concerning the ATP’s financial evaluation of the decision.

30.  

30358/15

Lodged on

15/06/2015

Filip RROCO

Article 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 320 of 16 November 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 1,195.59 sq. m, of which 1,145.59 sq. m were restored and the remaining 50 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of any decision.

Ulusi Bici

31.  

32865/15

Lodged on

14/09/2015

Dritan MULLA

Shkëlqim JAHJ

Haxhi MULLA

Besnike MULLA

Loreta ZANI (née MULLA)

Silvana TELI (née MULLA)

Rufo MULLA

Anita SHAMO (née MULLA)

Arben MULLA

Ilirjan MULLA

Flamur MULLA

Merita RRUDHA (née BUZI)

Artan BUZI

Hajdar BUZI

Fetije MULLA

Alketa MULLA

Aristotel KOLA

Alma MAHA (née MULLA)

Dojna OSMANI (née BUZI)

Articles 6 § 1, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 194 of 30 December 1996 the Saranda Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 7,200 sq. m, of which 5,058 sq. m were restored and the remaining 2,142 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

32.  

34631/15

Lodged on

13/07/2015

Agim KASMI

Ibrahim JAHJAGA

Naim KASMI

Bedrije KASHARI

Nadire JAHJA

Bledi KASMI

Nezihat KASMI

Ardi KASMI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1 of 20 April 2007 the Durrës Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 160,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Adi Brovina

33.  

35884/15

Lodged on

16/07/2015

Andis TIRANA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 243 of 3 March 1995 the Kavaja Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 2,650 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of any decision.

Suela Mëneri

By decision no. 58 of 1 October 1999 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 10,500 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 4,594 sq. m within the area to be compensated in the event of privatisation.

By decision no. 369 of 6 October 2000 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 6,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of a building occupying 23 sq. m in the event of privatisation and the right to joint ownership of 498 sq. m.

By decision no. 383 of 16 October 2000 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 36,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

34.  

36213/15

Lodged on

10/07/2015

Fatbardha TIRANA

Gent TIRANA

Dora TIRANA

Maja ADAMI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is the same as application no. 28461/15 the details of which have been described in row no. 21 above, was lodged by other heirs.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 28461/15 (row no. 21 above).

Suela Mëneri

35.  

36352/15

Lodged on

29/07/2015

Zinete CELA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 539 of 22 December 1999 the Pogradec District Court, modifying the Pogradec Commission decision no. 198 of 16 January 1994, recognised the applicant’s right to compensation by means of State bonds in respect of 1,697 sq. m.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Baftjar Rusi

36.  

37678/15

Lodged on

23/09/2015

Kujtim KËLLEZI

Bujar PETRELA

Myrshit VORPSI

Liljana BULKU (née VORPSI)

Suzana XHOMO (née KËLLEZI)

Hatixhe KËLLEZI

Albert KAZIU

Enki KAZIU

Klajdi KAZIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 184 of 18 July 2006 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 840,560 sq. m, of which 276,500 sq. m were restored and the remaining 564,060 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

37.  

37683/15

Lodged on

23/09/2015

Bujar PETRELA

Kujtim KËLLEZI

Myrshit VORPSI

Liljana BULKU (née VORPSI)

Suzana XHOMO (née KËLLEZI)

Hatixhe KËLLEZI

Albert KAZIU

Enki KAZIU

Klajdi KAZIU

Fiqrete PETRELA

Elvana DOBROLISHTI (née PETRELA)

Razije PETRELA

Anila PETRELA

Genti PETRELA

Enis SPAHIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 600 of 21 June 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 217.2 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

38.  

37685/15

Lodged on

23/09/2015

By decision no. 64/2 of 15 December 2005 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decisions no. 1091 of 28 December 1994 and no. 407 of 6 November 2000, restored the applicants 21,440 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 53,294 sq. m.

39.  

37696/15

Lodged on

23/09/2015

By decision no. 64 of 15 December 2005 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decisions no. 1090 of 28 December 1994 and no. 407 of 6 November 2001, restored the applicants 2,842 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 3,628 sq. m.

40.  

38827/15

Lodged on

23/09/2015

Gëzim LUGA

Sanije HYSKAJ

Hysen TEPELENA

Hysen LUGA

Jusuf FANI

Dilaver TEPELENA

Arben KALACI

Hajrije NALLBANI

Arnela LILA

Lauresha KAPIDANI

Mirvana KADIU

Mehriban LUGA

Edlira LUGA

Gentian LUGA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 699 of 2 September 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 425 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. In 2005 the applicants received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Ledio Milkani

41.  

40795/15

Lodged on

07/08/2015

Vehip ARAPI

Jetmira ARAPI

Irfan ARAPI

Lavdije ARAPI

Julinda ARAPI

Ismete ARAPI

Zeqine ARAPI

Indrit ARAPI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 2007 of 3 December 2004 the Supreme Court, modifying the Lushnja Commission decision no. 106 of 3 October 1994, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 165,000 sq. m, of which 5,000 sq. m were restored and the remaining 160,000 sq. m would be compensated in State bonds.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Genti Shani

42.  

40841/15

Lodged on

12/10/2015

Arben CANI

Emin SHIJAKU

Haxhi CANI

Merita TOSKA

Ilirian CANI

Ismail MURTHI

Albana THODHORI

Enrieta VOZGA

Fatlinda STRUGA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 405 of 20 September 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 7,734 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

43.  

41685/15

Lodged on

15/08/2015

Petrit KETA

Luan KETA

Shqipe KULA

Afërdita KARABOLLI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 331 of 1 November 2007 the Durrës Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 150,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

Following the financial evaluation of each decision by the ATP, the applicants have acceded to the accelerated payment scheme, as provided for in the 2015 Property Act, and have expressed their wish to withdraw the application.

Sokol Puto

By decision no. 369 of 26 December 2007 the Durrës Agency, modifying the Commission decision no. 49 of 9 March 1995, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 7,138.8 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 25 of 30 April 2008 the Durrës Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 10,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

44.  

41692/15

Lodged on

15/08/2015

Vjollca ALIKAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 617 of 12 August 1994 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 3,516 sq. m, of which 900 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of each decision, decided that the applicant was deemed to have been compensated.

Sokol Puto

By decision no. 359 of 27 September 2000 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decision no. 352 of 1 December 1995, recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 3,856 sq. m, of which 633 sq. m were restored and the remaining 3,223 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

45.  

42528/15

Lodged on

19/08/2015

Nuri XHEPA

Raimonda KASMI

Ismet XHEPA

Rezar XHEPA

Aida MEÇA

Iliriana BASHA

Luan STRINGA

Makbule BALA

Xhemal XHEPA

Zenepe ZALLA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 279/10 of 5 June 1996 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 4,340 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of the financial evaluation.

Kristaq Traja

By decision no. 279/6 of 30 August 1996 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 300 sq. m, of which 54 sq. m were restored and the remaining 246 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 279/8 of 20 September 1996 the Elbasan Commission recognised, amongst others, the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 72 sq. m.

By decision no. 1335 of 6 December 1999 the Elbasan District Court, modifying the Elbasan Commission decision no. 279/4 of 24 November 1995, restored the applicants a plot measuring 2,358 sq. m.

By decision no. 279/12 of 2 October 1996 the Elbasan Commission, supplementing its decision no. 279/4 of 24 November 1995, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 4,200 sq. m.

46.  

42545/15

Lodged on

22/08/2015

Xhafer AGARAJ

Kastriot MANCE

Naim MANCE

Kristi MANCE

Fatbardha MANCE

Heroine MANCE

Adriana METALI

Agron MANCE

Irini VILA

Nuri METE

Xhevdet METE

Luiza KREKA

Rushit FAMA

Edije XHOMAQI

Marie KRISTO

Eglantina RUMI

Ramije BACELLARI

Shpresa KAJO

Luiza TOTOJANI

Juljan FAMA

Anila AGARAJ

Ariadna THANO

Edlira BANO

Elona AGARAJ

Sadete AGARAJ

Naxhije ZHITI

Dorjan ZHITI

Beko CIFLIGU

Sheriban FRAKULLI

Pranvera LUZI

Ilirjan ZHITI

Dezdemona TARTARI

Arberesha SHULLA

Shkendije MUSABELLI

Drite LENJA

Gurije BALLIU

Flutur BEGAJ

Qendrime AGOLLI

Albana GJURA

Kimete CALLEKU

Violeta FRAKULLI

Bardhyl LENJA

Shpëtim ZHITI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 56 of 11 July 2007 the Berat Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 59,500 sq. m, of which 4,150 sq. m were restored and the remaining 55,350 sq. m would be compensated.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Suela Mëneri

By decision no. 1198 of 5 September 2013 the Berat Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 33,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

47.  

43479/15

Lodged on

28/08/2015

Fatbardha QOSJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 63 of 29 May 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 410 sq. m, of which 24 sq. m were restored and the remaining 386 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 120 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Rezarta Mëneri

48.  

44634/15

Lodged on

07/09/2015

Xhemali HANI

Fatime DAPI

Kane GEGA

Shaban GEGA

Shyqyri KRUJA

Hajrie NDREÇKA

Naim KRUJA

Petrit ISMAILI

Rezart ISMAILI

Enis ISMAILI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 91 of 30 June 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 1,452 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

49.  

46095/15

Lodged on

11/09/2015

Sadete BAJRAKTARI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 861 of 18 November 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 762.56 sq. m, of which 448.3 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised her right to first refusal of certain buildings.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Dorant Ekmekciu

By decision no. 283 of 13 October 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 1,239 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 449 of 19 February 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 396.5 sq. m, of which 18 sq. m were restored and the remaining 378.5 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 188 of 31 July 1996 the Kavaja Commission recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 5,000 sq. m.

50.  

46126/15

Lodged on

09/09/2015

Odin LIBOHOVA

Mimoza LIBOHOVA

Silven LIBOHOVA

Erval LIBOHOVA

Seres TURKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 27 of 14 February 2008 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 4,232.97 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Andrea Saccucci

51.  

46139/15

Lodged on

09/09/2015

Odin LIBOHOVA

Mimoza LIBOHOVA

Silven LIBOHOVA

Erval LIBOHOVA

Seres TURKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 134 of 12 June 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 5,019 sq. m, of which 2,593 sq. m were restored and the remaining 2,426 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Andrea Saccucci

52.  

46873/15

Lodged on

16/09/2015

Leka II ZOGU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 244 of 20 August 2008 the Property Agency, modifying the Tirana Commission decision no. 396 of 31 July 2006, recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 16,577 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Andrea Saccucci

53.  

50767/15

Lodged on

06/10/2015

Arjan GJELI

Fitnet TAMBURI

Vjollca GJELI

Agim PUSTINA

Manjola GJELI

Aida KURANI

Mirvjena GJELI

lma MATI

Enis GJELI

Fiqerete GJELI

Eva GJELI

Gert GJELI

Bukurie SHKUPI (née PUSTINA)

Rebeka DOLLANI (née PUSTINA)

Rozana HOXHAJ (née PUSTINA)

Sulejman SHEMSIU

Fatos SHEMSIU

Xheladin GJELI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 394 of 31 July 2006 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decisions no. 125 of 26 June 1995 and no. 10 of 28 December 2001, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 146,000 sq. m, of which
22,255.3 sq. m were restored and the remaining 123,744.7 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

In 2020, further to the exercise of the right to first refusal, the applicants became the owners of a few buildings.

Sprio Dodbiba

54.  

50841/15

Lodged on

06/10/2015

By decision no. 10 of 28 December 2001 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decision no. 126 of 26 June 1995, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 200,000 sq. m, of which 18,500 sq. m were restored and the remaining 181,500 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

55.  

50963/15

Lodged on

10/10/2015

Renato SHEHU

Qerime SHEHU

Ahmet SHEHU

Genci SHEHU

Leonora BAJRAMI

Irena ORDOLLI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 64 of 25 January 1995 the Vlora Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 2,240 sq. m.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of the decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Sokol Puto

56.  

51260/15

Lodged on

09/10/2015

Nikoll PERLESI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 207 of 27 December 1996 the Mirdita Commission recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in kind or by means of State bonds in the amount of ALL 37,520 (approx. EUR 299).

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Aleksander Perlesi

57.  

53112/15

Lodged on

20/10/2015

Kristaq KAFERXHI

Pandeli FACE

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 611/1 of 7 April 1995 the Korça Commission, modifying its decision no. 611 of 13 January 1995, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 3,099 sq. m. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 500 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Bafttjar Rusi

58.  

53833/15

Lodged on

28/10/2015

Lumturi ZHITI

Xhuljeta SKUKA

Djana LOLI

Maksut ZHITI

Besnik ZHITI

Vjollca TAKE

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is the same as application no. 42545/15 the details of which have been described above in row no. 46 above, was lodged by other heirs.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 42545/15 (row no.46 above).

Suela Mëneri

59.  

56435/15

Lodged on

10/11/2015

Ylli KOCIBELLINJ

Arben KOCIBELLINJ

Albana RAKIPI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 93 of 4 February 1997 the Korça Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 75,250 sq. m which would be compensated by means of State bonds in the amount of ALL 1,378,200 (approx. EUR 10,989).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Sokol Puto

60.  

56446/15

Lodged on

10/11/2015

Ali KOSOVA

Astrit PERMETI

Arjan PERMETI

Aida PODGORICA

Sokol KOSOVA

Shqipe KOSOVA

Ermira HYDI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1471 of 28 June 1996 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 10,000 sq. m, of which 6,000 sq. m were restored and 400 sq. m (10 per cent of the remaining area) would be compensated by means of States Bonds.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decisions.

Sokol Puto

By decision no. 1696 of 23 November 1996 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation by means of State bonds in respect of 229.62 sq. m.

By decision no. 142 of 30 April 2015 the Property Agency, modifying the Durrës Commission decision no. 406 of 1 January 1994, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,000 sq. m, of which 200 sq. m would be compensated in the amount of ALL 3,579,600 (approx. EUR 28,541.4) and the remaining 800 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

61.  

56491/15

Lodged on

10/11/2015

Aleksander MOISIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 210 of 7 July 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 1,100 sq. m, of which 492 sq. m were restored and the remaining 608 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

Following the ATP’s financial evaluation of decisions no. 210 of 7 July 1995 and no. 210 of 26 February 2008, the applicant has acceded to the accelerated payment scheme, as provided for in the 2015 Property Act, and has expressed his wish to withdraw the application in respect of these two decisions.

Sokol Puto

By decision no. 210 of 26 February 2008 the Berat Agency recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 904,421 sq. m.

By decision no. 388 of 30 July 1997 the Fier Commission recognised the applicant’s right to compensation by means of State bonds in respect of 6,877.2 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of this decision.

By decision no. 197 of 31 January 2008 the Berat Agency recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 237,664 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of this decision.

By decision no. 169 of 31 December 2007 the Berat Agency restored the applicant 107,861 sq. m and recognised his right to compensation in respect of 892,139 sq. m.

The applicant has not provided any information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

62.  

57432/15

Lodged on

12/11/2015

Terenzio D’ALENA

Maria Cristina D’ALENA

Maria Cristina TOCCI

Fausta MONACO

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 575 of 19 April 1996 the Tirana Commission restored the applicants 1,188 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 240.57 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

63.  

57612/15

Lodged on

17/11/2015

Orion ZAVALANI

Dritan ZVALANI

Kastriot ZVALANI

Sokol ZVALANI

Dolora LAMA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 116 of 12 May 1997 the Fier Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 56,000 sq. m which would be compensated by means of State bonds in the amount ALL 1,366,400 (approx. EUR 10,894.8).

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

64.  

59814/15

Lodged on

27/11/2015

Makbule MANDIJA

Ledina MANDIJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 353 of 31 July 2012 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 2,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Avni Shehu

By decision no. 354 of 31 July 2012 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 2,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 365 of 3 August 2012 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 6,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

65.  

60045/15

Lodged on

27/11/2015

Thoma KOSTA

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 601 of 1 December 1998 the Gjirokastër Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 3,836 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

It would appear that the ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

66.  

61927/15

Lodged on

14/12/2015

Gazment DIBRA

Adnan DIBRA

Luan DIBRA

Hirma DIBRA

Genc DIBRA

Artan DIBRA

Dashuri DIBRA

Ilir DIBRA

Nermin DIZDARI

Monika ORGOCKA

Ingrid TOSKA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 176 of 16 August 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited right to compensation in respect of 926 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Vikor Gumi

67.  

62190/15

Lodged on

08/12/2015

Besnik TAFMIZI

Belul TAFMIZI

Foti NIKOLLA

Megi BARJAMAJ

Eriketa OSMENAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 739 of 30 October 1996 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decision no. 246 of 25 July 1995, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 4,135 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

68.  

62191/15

Lodged on

08/12/2015

Besnik TAFMIZI

Belul TAFMIZI

Foti NIKOLLA

Megi BARJAMAJ

Eriketa OSMENAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1260 of 20 September 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited right to in-kind compensation in respect of 2,150 sq. m. It also recognised their right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 980 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

69.  

69/16

Lodged on

16/12/2015

Sotir PIQONI

Aleksander PIQONI

Vladimir PIQONI

Katerina MANUSHI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 114 of 5 February 1996 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 70,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Sinan Tafaj

70.  

230/16

12/12/2015

Shqiponja VATHI

Luljeta SHUMNERI (née VATHI)

Vjollca DIBRA (née VATHI)

Lumturije BARDHI (née VATHI)

Ahmet VATHI

Fadil VATHI

Dëshira BEJKO (née VATHI)

Shaban VATHI

Fatime LELO (née VATHI)

Rasim KAIMI

Ali KAIMI

Sami KAIMI

Ridvan KAIMI

Eleni LICI

Besim (Besmir) KURTI

Rezart OKETA

Elton OKETA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 441 of 15 February 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 25,450 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

By decision no. 550 of 3 May 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 6,350 sq. m.

By decision no. 94 of 25 July 1997 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 12,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

71.  

577/16

Lodged on

29/12/2015

Fatmira KOSTA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 53 of 15 March 2000 the Saranda Commission restored the applicant a plot measuring 3,425 sq. m and recognised her right to compensation in respect of 12,528 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

72.  

590/16

Lodged on

19/12/2015

Hekuran HALILI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 500 of 20 March 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 5,860 sq. m, of which 4, 450 sq. m were restored and 360 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. The remaining 1,050 sq. m was restored following the exercise of the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

73.  

601/16

Lodged on

19/12/2015

Kumrije RADA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1305 of 28 March 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 1,349.74 sq. m, of which 342 sq. m were restored and 1,007.74 sq. would be compensated in accordance with the law. In 2013 the applicant received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Shkelqim Rada

74.  

830/16

Lodged on

14/12/2015

Esat KARAPICI

Ruzhdi KARAPICI

Jemine KARAPICI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 642 of 18 July 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 647 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Ilir Qelija

75.  

1360/16

Lodged on

28/12/2015

Elida TOPTANI

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 114 of 14 April 1995 the Fier Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 19,700 sq. m which would be compensated in the amount of ALL 6,304,000 (approx. EUR 50,610).

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

76.  

3803/16

Lodged on

31/12/2015

Gazment DIBRA

Adnan DIBRA

Luan DIBRA

Hirma DIBRA

Genc DIBRA

Artan DIBRA

Dashuri DIBRA

Ilir DIBRA

Monika ORGOCKA

Ingrid TOSKA

Fatmir BABAMETO

Bonin TOPTANI

Xhimi (qazim) DIBRA

Elda KONOMI

Nasibe QOSE

Drita BOBRATI

Nermin DIBRA

Rahmi QORALIU

Lulzim TOPTANI

Astrit TOPTANI

Kadri LIBOHOVA

Armando LIBOHOVA

Xhevat LIBOHOVA

Mirjeta BABAMETO

Teuta RECI

Grabon VRIONI

Saimir VRIONI

Nervin STAROVA

Aurora JEGENI

Altin VRIONI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 631 of 15 August 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 883.9 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Viktor Gumi

By decision no. 893 of 1 December 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 635 sq. m, of which 40 sq. m were restored and the remaining 595 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

By decision no. 487 of 19 March 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 23,920 sq. m, of which 17,460 sq. m were restored and the remaining 6,460 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

By decision no. 633 of 8 July 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,315 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

By decision no. 140 of 30 September 1997 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 35,974 sq. m.

By decision no. 2 of 19 September 2005 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 1,100,110 sq. m.

77.  

3809/16

Lodged on

29/12/2015

Ardjan DERHEMI

Nazmi DERHEMI

Besnike NDONI

Qamile LLACI[5]

Bedrije LICI

Ridian DERHEMI

Semiha HUQI

Hyrije DUKA

Liljana LIKU

Iglimona KALAJA

Lirije DERHEMI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13

By decision no. 41 of 7 April 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 12,000 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Artan Mertiri

78.  

3812/16

Lodged on

30/12/2015

Robert BOROVA

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is the same as application no. 60045/15 the details of which have been described in row no. 65 above, was lodged by another heir.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 60045/15 (row no. 65 above).

79.  

3826/16

Lodged on

08/01/2016

Altin ISMAILI

Petrit ISMAILI

Alma TOPALLI (née ISMAILI)

Sabrije ISMALILI

Safete SINA (née ISMAILI)

File ZAJMI (née ISMAILI)

Shpresa DIÇI (née ISMAILI)

Ilir ISMAILI

Skënder ISMAILI

Lulzim ISMAILI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 543 of 23 April 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 29,500 sq. m, of which 9,192 sq. m were restored and the remaining 20,308 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

By decision no. 735 of 19 October 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 14,000 sq. m, of which 9,950 sq. m were restored and the remaining 4,050 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

80.  

4082/16

Lodged on

07/01/2016

Hysen SARAÇI

Pellumb SARAÇI

Aishe LLAGAMI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1206 of 3 March 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 33,920 sq. m, of which 10,000 sq. m were restored and the remaining 23,920 sq. m would be compensated.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Xhevdet Sheta

By decision no. 431 of 9 November 2000 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decision no. 157 of 8 March 2000, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 20,168 sq. m.

81.  

5932/16

Lodged on

22/01/2016

Aleksander GAVOCI

Ilir GAVOCI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 373 of 19 December 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 9,851.5 sq. m, of which
1,548 sq. m were restored and 8,053.5 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 2,125 sq. m on the land to be compensated in the event of privatisation.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Aleksander Gavoçi

82.  

5938/16

Lodged on

29/01/2016

Lirika KOCIBELLI

Jani PEMA

Fiqirije KOCIBELLI

Florenca HAXHI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 264 of 24 December 1999 the Korça Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 10,000 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

83.  

6828/16

Lodged on

29/01/2016

Diturije VENXHA

Fiqri VENXHA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 649 of 21 April 2000 the Korça District Court, modifying its decision no. 779 of 21 April 1995, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 3,100.25 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Viktor Gumi

By decision no. 34 of 14 February 2007 the Korça Agency recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 17,000 sq. m.

84.  

6853/16

Lodged on

29/01/2016

Selajdin KUSHE

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1175 of 17 November 1995 the Korça Commission recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 10,400 sq. m. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

85.  

7633/16

Lodged on

01/02/2016

Kujtim BORICI

Mejreme DIZDARI

Behije RUSTEMI

Nuredin BORICI

Suzana DACI

Lindita BORICI

Astrit BORICI

Lucie COLI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 2488/6 of 21 November 2008 the Property Agency, modifying the Fier Commission decision no. 814 of 21 July 2008, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 1,669.75 sq. m.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation.

Endri Kotherja

86.  

7645/16

Lodged on

01/02/2016]

Myzejen BYLYKBASHI

Mustafa ARAPI

Osman ARAPI

Minerva KOTHERJA

Xhemil GJERGJI

Ferzilet SARJA

Zedlir BYLYKBASHI

Armand BYLYKBASHI

Myzejen CAKU

Ermira GARUNJA

Qazim BYLYKBASHI

Enerjeta MALKJA

Myrteza KARDHASHI

Hysen KARDHASHI

Suzana BAKALLI

Burbuqe GARUNJA

Flora SPAHIU

Shejnaz KARDHASHI

Makbule SAMARXHIU

Rajmonda SHEHETILA

Articles 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 381/2 of 16 September 1994 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 590 sq. m. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 2,510 sq. m in the event of privatisation. On an unspecified date, it would appear that the applicants became the owners of 1,833.6 sq. m out of 2,510 sq. m.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Endri Kotherja

Following the applicants’ civil action concerning the payment of rent for a plot measuring 876 sq. m in respect of which the right to first refusal had been recognised, the domestic courts dismissed it on the ground that the impugned plot, on which office buildings belonging to a State institution had been constructed in 1969 and were being used in the public interest, had not been restored to the applicants and the authorities had not invited them to exercise the right to first refusal of the buildings. On 17 September 2015 the applicants received notice of the Constitutional Court’s decision which had dismissed their constitutional complaint on 9 June 2015.

87.  

8373/16

Lodged on

04/02/2016

Shyqyri HYSKJA

Adriano HASTOPALLI

Ornela ABDIHOXHA

Hysen HYSKJA

Loreta QOSJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 21 of 19 April 2016 the Tirana Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,100 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Avni Shehu

88.  

8825/16

Lodged on

04/02/2016

Hysen HYSKJA

Shyqyri HYSKJA

Adriano HASTOPALLI

Ornela ABDIHOXHA

Loreta QOSJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 473/2 of 26 June 1996 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 5,341 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Avni Shehu

89.  

9833/16

Lodged on

16/02/2016

Tomi PROGRI

Arben PROGRI

Nestor PROGRI

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1033 of 25 August 1995 the Korça Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property right to 376 sq. m, of which 100 sq. m were restored and 256 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It further recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of a building occupying 20 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Tomi Progri

As a result of the expropriation of the applicants’ inherited property in 1957, in respect of which their inherited property rights were recognised the Korça Commission in 1995, the applicants were allocated a house for which they paid a sum of money as compensation. In the meantime, by decision no. 1126 of 27 October 1995 the Korça Commission recognised a third party’s inherited property rights to the house as well as the underlying plot of land, which the applicants claimed to have been allocated to them in good faith in 1957. It ordered the third party to pay the applicants the value of investment they had made throughout the years, and it further ordered the financial unit of the municipality to pay the applicants the price they had paid in 1957, as indexed over the years.

In 2009 the applicants made an application for financial compensation in respect of the award determined in the Commission decision no. 1126 of 27 October 1995. On 16 November 2009 the Property Agency held that the applicants could not be considered expropriated owners within the meaning of that Commission decision as it had recognised the third party’s inherited property rights. Furthermore, the awards made therein could not be considered financial compensation, within the meaning of the 2004 Property Act, which had to be paid by the State. It thus dismissed the application. The applicant’s appeal against the 2009 Property Agency decision was finally dismissed by the Constitutional Court on 8 October 2015.

90.  

9839/16

Lodged on

11/02/2016

Merita XHAFERAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13

By decision no. 153 of 15 March 2000 the Saranda Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 82,000 sq. m, of which 3,425 sq. m were restored and 12,258 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

91.  

10883/16

Lodged on

18/02/2016

Makbule MANDIJA

Ledina MANDIJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13

By decision no. 356 of 31 July 2012 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 50 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Avni Shehu

By decision no. 122/2 of 16 February 1995 the Shkodra Commission, modifying its decision no. 122 of 17 January 1994, recognised the applicants’ inherited property right to 2,790 sq. m, of which 1,860 sq. m were restored and the remaining 930 sq. m would be compensated. In 2011 the applicants received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

92.  

10899/16

Lodged on

19/02/2016

Dylejman SALIAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 672 of 7 August 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 39,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Avni Shehu

93.  

11212/16

Lodged on

15/02/2016

Gazmend HASEKIU

Manushaqe BEJTJA

Nimete TURHANI

Engjellushe BUMCI

Fatbardha VARDARI

Mahmut XHANI

Ajla SHISHMANI

Arben XHANI

Ibrahim HASEKIU

Ardjan HASEKIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application is the same as application no. 26340/15 the details of which have been described in row no. 18 above.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 26340/15 (row no. 18 above).

Endri Kotherja

94.  

14109/16

Lodged on

10/03/2016

Shkëlqim TOPÇIU

Articles 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 80 of 8 July 1997 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 14,000 sq. m, of which 648 sq. m were restored and the remaining 13,352 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 4,358 sq. m on the land to be compensated in the event of privatisation.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Kristaq Traja

95.  

14390/16

Lodged on

10/03/2016

Bukurosh GJATA

Altin GJATA

Agron GJATA

Zegjine PEQINI GJEVORI

Halime GJATA

Rudina GJATA

Adela GJATA

Engjellushe DHIMITRI

Articles 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is the same as application no. 7645/16 the details of which have been described in row no. 86 above, was lodged by other heirs.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 7645/16 (row no. 86 above).

Endri Kotherja

96.  

16922/16

Lodged on

25/03/2016

Klea SPIRO

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 2755 of 26 October 1995 the Korça District Court, modifying the Korça Commission decision no. 814 of 5 May 1995, recognised the applicant’s right to compensation by means of State bonds in respect of 3,000 sq. m. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

97.  

18669/16

Lodged on

31/03/2016

Mirjam STERMASI

Nezihat STERMASI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 286 of 16 February 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 20,000 sq. m, of which 11,000 sq. m were restored. It did not award any compensation.

Following the institution of domestic court proceedings by third parties against the plot of land which had been restored to the applicants, on 26 February 2013 the Supreme Court rejected the applicants’ cassation appeal against the lower courts’ decisions which had annulled the restoration in natura, no right to compensation having been recognised.

It transpires that on 30 October 2015 the applicants lodged a fresh claim seeking the restitution and/or compensation of their property, to which no response has been given to date.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting the provision of updated information.

Kristaq Traja

98.  

21990/16

Lodged on

15/04/2016

Myzejen RAMA

Ikbale MEÇA

Bukurije BIDOSHI

Behxhet DELIALLISI

Petrit DELIALLISI MILLA

Kadrije DELIALLISI

Adnan DELIALLISI

Egon DELIALLISI

Gentian DELIALLISI

Articles 6 § 1, 13 and 14 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 106 of 23 November 1995 the Shijak Commission, modifying its decision no. 15 of 13 October 1993, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 100,000 sq. m, of which 10,000 sq. m were restored and the remaining 90,000 sq. m would be compensated by means of State bonds. To date, only 5,000 sq. m have been restored and the remaining 5,000 sq. m have been occupied by unlawful constructions and no compensation has been awarded.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Kristaq Traja

99.  

24942/16

Lodged on

27/04/2016

Azis HYSKA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 126 of 26 June 2002 the Berat Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 46,400 sq. m and awarded compensation in the amount of ALL 4,364,800 (approx. EUR 35,041) in respect of 13,640 sq. m.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Edmond Gjini

100.  

25951/16

Lodged on

01/05/2016

Skender KOSTURI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 157 of 31 July 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 858 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Edmond Gjini

101.  

29345/16

Lodged on

18/05/2016

Mustafa BALLA

Avdulla BALLA

Kasem BALLA

Mediha ÇELA

Fatbardha BIBA

Myzejen SEFERI

Lulzim BALLA

Yllka BALLA

Adnand BALLA

Elda KURTI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1234 of 20 November 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 12,712 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Aida Prifti

102.  

29364/16

Lodged on

26/05/2016

Vasillaq KEDHI

Aliqi FERRO (née KEDHI)

Ana KEDHI (née ANGJELI)

Lejdja PAPA (née KEDHI)

Josif KEDHI

Stiliano KOMATA

Eno KOMATA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 332 of 9 June 2000 the Vlora Court of Appeal, modifying the Vlora Commission decision no. 111 of 25 September 1996, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 11,414 sq. m.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Endri Kotherja

103.  

32655/16

Lodged on

18/05/2016

Myslym BALLA

Fadil BALLA

Hamit BALLA

Mereme SHERA

Bakushe KOLA

Bukurie LUARI

Ermira SPAHIU

Mahmut KATROSHI

Shkëlqim KATROSHI

Nusret BILANI

Orkidia BILANI

Feliks BILANI

Art. 13, Art. 6 (1), Prot. 1 Art. 1

By decision no. 1235 of 20 November 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 56,000 sq. m, of which 43,610 sq. m were restored and the remaining 12,390 sq. m would be compensated. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings located in the land to be compensated in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Aida PRIFTI

104.  

32668/16

Lodged on

25/05/2016

Ismail XHURA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 508 of 28 March 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 800 sq. m, of which 475 sq. m were restored and the remaining 325 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decisions.

Viktor Gumi

By decision no. 90 of 6 June 2007 the Tirana Property Agency, modifying the Tirana Commission decision no. 23 of 11 August 1999, recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 832 sq. m.

By decision no. 158 of 3 February 2006 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 39,215 sq. m.

By decision no. 159 of 3 February 2006 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 770 sq. m.

105.  

32686/16

Lodged on

24/05/2016

Kadife TROKSI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 330 of 28 June 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 12,000 sq. m, of which 10,200 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

106.  

32781/16

Lodged on

30/05/2016

Elvira TAKA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is the same as application no. 9839/16 the details of which have been described in row no. 90 above, was lodged by another heir.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 9839/16 (row no. 90 above).

107.  

32785/16

Lodged on

25/05/2016

Vasiliqi XHARAHU

Marika PRIFTI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 632 of 17 January 2003 the Gjirokastër Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 4,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Aida Prifti

108.  

32791/16

Lodged on

25/05/2016

Kushtrim TAKA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is the same as application no. 9839/16 the details of which have been described in row no. 90 above, was lodged by another heir.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 9839/16 (row no. 90 above).

109.  

32803/16

Lodged on

25/05/2016

Vangjel COKA

Geraldina MIHALI

Romeo RAMA

Jani RAMA

Vasken RAMA

Valentina ÇOKA

Irena ÇOKA

Jorgji ÇOKA

Nikoleta SKAKA

Stavri ÇOKA

Andrea NAÇE

Robert NAÇE

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 303 of 25 October 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 150,000 sq. m, of which 29,700 sq. m were restored and the remaining 120,300 sq. m would be compensated by means of State bonds.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of the decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Sokol Puto

110.  

32866/16

Lodged on

08/06/2016

Artur TAHIRI

Drita TAHIRI

Aida SHABA

Merita KUCI

Mirela PEQINI

Enriketa BABOCI

Arben BULQIZA

Arben TAHIRI

Hektor TAHIRI

Kliton MALI

Rigels MALI

Ramazan BULQIZA

Agron BULQIZA

Shpresa RUSHITI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 981 of 10 April 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 766 sq. m, of which 94 sq. m were restored and the remaining 672 sq. m would be compensated.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

111.  

33126/16

Lodged on

08/06/2016

Klea SPIRO

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 24 of 6 February 2007 the Korça Agency recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 10,060 sq. m, of which 3,900 sq. m were restored and the remaining 6,160 sq. m would be compensated.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

112.  

35772/16

Lodged on

15/06/2016

Dashamir KAMBERAJ

Hydai KAMBERAJ

Kozeta PRENDI

Mereme ISUFAJ

Irena XHUFI

Oliver ZAJMI KOTONAJ

Aida XHUFI GËRMENJI

Shqipe ZAJMI KOTONAJ

Luljeta ZAJMI KOTONAJ CINGU

Zejnulla ZAJMI

Eranda ZAJMI KOTONAJ BEDALLI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 128 of 19 January 2000 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 10,600 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Arben Muka

113.  

36716/16

Lodged on

22/06/2016

Avni CENMURATI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 204 of 29 May 2000 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 207 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

114.  

36726/16

Lodged on

22/06/2016

Luftare ALLA

115.  

37141/16

Lodged on

22/06/2016

Agim CENMURATI

116.  

40735/16

Lodged on

11/07/2016

Fatime LULI

Skënder LULI[6]

Bukurije DEDEJ

Bujar LULI

Lindita LULI

Drita RROGA

Flutura SHAKAJ

Fatmir LULI

Dhurata KALAJA

Ilirjan LULI

Dylaver LULI

Genci LULI

Xheni LULI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is a follow-up to this Court’s judgment in the case of Luli v. Albania, no. 30601/08, 15 September 2015), has been lodged by other heirs in respect of their own shares of land. They complain about the authorities’ failure to pay them compensation in respect of the same domestic decisions.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation.

Suela Mëneri

117.  

46530/16

Lodged on

04/08/2016

Niko VEIZAJ

Krupskaja VEIZAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 853 of 6 June 2002 the Vlora District Court, modifying the Vlora Commission decision no. 47 of 2 July 1994, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 4,300 sq. m, of which 218 sq. m were restored and the remaining 4,082 sq. m would be compensated.

By decision no. 973 of 27 January 2014 the Tirana District Court restored the applicants 400 sq. m out of 4,082 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of the remaining 3,682 sq. m.

It would appear that the ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Edmond Gjini

118.  

60181/16

Lodged on

12/10/2016

Sude ISMAILI

Silvana MEÇA (ISMAILI)

Etleva ISMALILI

Enkelejda ISMAILI

Dilbere ISMAILI

Albana GJOKA (ISMAILI)

Mimoza HOXHA (ISMAILI)

Taulant ISMALILI

Ardian ISMAILI

Rife SINA

Behare SHIMA (KOSOVA)

Bashkim SHIMA

Ndriçim SHIMA

Liljana SHIMA (MEXHITI)

Alfred SHIMA

Nazmi SHIMA

Aida MELHANI (SHIMA)

Sherife KRYEZIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is the same as application no. 3826/16 the details of which have been described in row no. 79 above, was lodged by other heirs.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 3826/16 (row no. 79 above).

Xhevdet Sheta

119.  

63480/16

Lodged on

18/04/2017

Behije NGRACANI

Fiqirete LILAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 24 of 22 September 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 50,690 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Paulin Paplekaj

120.  

63841/16

Lodged on

01/11/2016

Agron DOBI

Qefsere DOBI

Bujar DOBI

Gazmend DOBI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1386 of 14 May 1996 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 41,900 sq. m, of which 9,500 sq. m would be compensated in kind and 3,240 sq. m (10% of the remaining 32,400 sq. m) would be compensated by means of State bonds. It further recognised the right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Edmond Gjini

121.  

161/17

Lodged on

23/12/2016

Muharrem SHABA

Bakushe MUÇA

Zija SHABA

Bukurie REÇI

Drita SHKALLA

Sulltane KEPI

Arben SHABA

Dallandyshe SHABA

Altin SHABA

Lulzim HOXHA

Silvana KASEMI

Shaban SHABA

Lavdim SHABA

Alfred SHABA

Edmond SHABA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 241 of 12 September 1995 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decision no. 19 of 7 January 1994, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 9,361 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision has been pending before the Supreme Court since 20 January 2020.

Aida Prifti

By decision no. 234 of 14 August 2008 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 175,910 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

122.  

7454/17

Lodged on

17/01/2017

Gjeraqina SULA

Arjan SULA

Hektor SULA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 430 of 15 April 1994 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 22,072.4 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Gentiana Tirana

By decision no. 947 of 17 August 1995 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 720 sq. m which would be compensated in kind.

By decision no. 1612 of 4 October 1996 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 4,000 sq. m, of which 3,250 sq. m was restored and the remaining 750 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

123.  

9957/17

Lodged on

25/01/2017

Isuf TAGA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 216 of 29 March 2000 the Kurbin Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 18,800 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Gentiana Tirana

By decision no. 5 of 20 October 2005 the Lezha Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 77,916 sq. m, of which 69,016 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It further recognised the right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 8,900 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

124.  

22572/17

Lodged on

16/03/2017

Etleva METANI

Gëzim REKA

Pranvera BEÇI

Ylli METANI

Hajrie MULLA

Besa THAÇI

Artan THAÇI

Zyhra ZELKA

Vjollca MULLA

Sabahet BELBA

Haxhire RUDAKU

Majlinda VRAPI

Indira DHIMOGJIKA

Myzejen ANGONI

Prifti MELIHA

Luan METANI

Agron THAÇI

Agron METANI

Dhurata ALLA

Robert METANI

Lirika METANI

Lirie ANAGNOSTOU

Bujar METANI

Belinda METANI

Gazmend METANI

Sanie METANI

Ermira SHKURTI

Mimoza LARUSHKU

Bukurije SULA

Fatbardha METANI

Rovena METANI

Erion METANI

Artur METANI

Denada DIMA

Rabije AVDIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 908 of 7 December 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 9,226 sq. m.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Edmond Gjini

125.  

28537/17

Lodged on

10/04/2017

Aneta PRENDI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 449 of 28 August 2000 the Kavaja Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 17,500 sq. m, of which 10,000 sq. m would be compensated in kind and 750 sq. m (10% of the remaining 7,500 aq. m) would be compensated by means of State bonds.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Mirion Theodhosi

126.  

35959/17

Lodged on

12/05/2017

Abdon YPI

Nevis BREGASI

Helga TOPI (YPI)

Blendi FEVZIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 67 of 6 April 2006 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 2,551,937.7 sq. m, of which
179,852 sq. m were restored and the remaining 2,372,085.7 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision on the financial evaluation would appear to be pending before the Supreme Court since 13 May 2020.

Aida Prifti

By decision no. 283 of 8 January 2008 the Tirana Property Agency restored the applicants 71,568 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of
2,062 sq. m. It further recognised the right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decisions.

By decision no. 154 of 30 June 2008 the Tirana Property Agency restored the applicants 27,052 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of
15,146 sq. m.

127.  

43319/17

Lodged on

09/06/2017

Petrit DERHEMI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 217 of 5 June 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 33,000 sq. m, of which 9,928 sq. m were restored and 14,672 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law, no decision having been made in respect of the remaining 8,400 sq. m.

The applicant has not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting updated information.

Artan Spahiu

128.  

43372/17

Lodged on

14/06/2017

Beqir KALLÇIU

Redi KALLÇIU

Fatmir KRUTANI

Besnik VORPSI

Gëzim KALLÇIU

Dashamir KALLÇIU

Argjent KALLÇIU

Fatbardh KALLÇIU

Flamur KALLÇIU

Suzana KALLÇIU (DEMNERI)

Fatime KALLÇIU (née MYDERIZI)

Hajdije KALLÇIU

Afërdita KALLÇIU (née BEQIRI)

Monika KALLÇIU (née XHAFERRI)

Fatbardha KALLÇIU

Enea KALLÇIU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1701 of 23 November 1996 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 17,000 sq. m, of which 9,367.5 sq. m were restored and 700 sq. m (10% of the remaining 7,000 sq. m) would be compensated by means of State bonds, the applicants having been compensated in respect of 632.5 sq. m by the Durrës Commission decision no. 1501 of 11 July 1996.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Viktor Gumi

129.  

53299/17

Lodged on

20/07/2017

Eqerem LIKAJ

Majlinda KARALI

Enkelejda THIMJO

Suzana BRATI

Alma LIKAJ

Violeta MEMINI

Monika MUKA

Merita KEÇI

Adriano LIKAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 744 of 14 February 1995 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 7,720 sq. m, of which 1,364 sq. m was restored and the remaining 6,356 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Edmond Gjini

130.  

53322/17

Lodged on

20/07/2017

Gëzim BALLANCA

Emirjeta ÇOADARI

Fehmije SINANI

Anife ALIKO

Yllka BALLANCA

Nadire BALLANCA

Myzejen ELEZI

Elida BALLANCA

Prikena TOPALLI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 375 of 27 December 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,329 sq. m, of which 1,167 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It ordered the occupiers of the remaining 162 sq. m to pay rent or buy the land from the applicants.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Edmond Gjini

131.  

64201/17

Lodged on

24/08/2017

Sotiraq PEPO

Maria RAKO

Ina PASHAJ

Altea FRASHERI

Evri PEPO

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1141 of 3 November 1995 the Korça Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 14,500 sq. m, of which 218 sq. m were restored and 10,428 sq. m, as capped by law, would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decisions.

Besim Peka

By decision no. 1034 of 25 August 1996 the Korça Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 8,000 sq. m.

132.  

69427/17

Lodged on

16/09/2017

Ilir DERVISHI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1142 of 2 October 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 14,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Ramadan Caco

133.  

5514/18

Lodged on

23/01/2018

Lulzim ALLA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 105 of 29 August 1997 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property right to 60,000 sq. m which would be compensated by means of State bonds in the amount of ALL 1,464,000 (approx. EUR 1,166). It further recognised the right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Sinan Tafaj

By decision no. 113 of 14 October 1997 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 50,000 sq. m which would be compensated by means of State bonds in the amount of ALL 1,220,000 (approx. EUR 9,721). It further recognised the right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

134.  

10222/18

Lodged on

22/02/2018

Ilda COBA

Regjina ÇOBA

Gjon ÇOBA

Jozefina TOPALLI

Ndrek HARAPI

Mari HARAPI

Roberto CEA

Michele CEA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 34 of 23 September 1993 the Shkodra Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,016 sq. m, of which 516 sq. m were restored and the remaining 500 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. In 2011 applicants received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Viktor Gumi

By decision no. 290 of 26 October 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 783.57 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised their right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation. In 2005 the applicants received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

By decision no. 358 of 4 December 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 782 sq. m, of which 30 were restored and the remaining 752 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 1530 of 27 November 1996 the Shkodra Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 6,550 sq. m, of which 1,100 sq. m were restored and 2,400 sq. m would be compensated. It further recognised their right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 3,050 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

135.  

13344/18

Lodged on

13/03/2018

Arian BIMO

Vjollca ZHULLA

Mirvjena LAHA

Vilma HOXHA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 50 of 15 January 1997 the Vlora Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 204,500 sq. m, the value of which was assessed to be ALL 3,496,500 (approx. EUR 27,863).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Arben Muka

136.  

14418/18

Lodged on

19/03/2018

Avdulla SGURA

Hatixhe HYSNELAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 102 of 23 April 2008 the Tirana Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 10,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants have not provided any response to a letter sent by the Registry on 2 January 2020 requesting information about the authorities’ determination of financial evaluation.

Aleksander Muskaj

137.  

16888/18

Lodged on

05/04/2018

Fiqirete BRARI

Gëzim BRARI

Ymer BRARI

Sadete MUÇA

Myzejen XHAMETA

Hatixhe BULKU

Hajrije XHAFA

Mahmud BRARI

Kume GURAJA

Kujtim LUSHA

Bledar BRARI

Zenepe GARUNJA

Xhevit BRARI

Lumturi BRARI

Agron BRARI

Xhemile DELIU

Artan BRARI

Albert BRARI

Bardh BRARI

Ilmi BRARI

Durim BRARI

Sulltane XEXA

Merita MEMOÇI

Sherife BRARI

Sheqere XHAFA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 427 of 19 November 2000 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decision no. 653 of 8 August 1996, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 18,593 sq. m. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of each decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Elton Lula

138.  

35329/18

Lodged on

19/07/2018

Lirie HALILI (SHATKU)

Iljaz SHATKU

Gjyze MUÇA

Violeta DERRAJ

Emine PERLALA

Sulejman KUNIQI

Lumturije BARDHI

Besnike KUNIQI

Ballkize SHATKU

Yllka ULI

Ana SHATKU

Blendi SHATKU

Drita SHATKU

Fatbardha SHATKU

Gentiana SHATKU

Viola SHATKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 61 of 7 June 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 291.5 sq. m, of which 162 sq. m were restored and the remaining 129 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Paulin Paplekaj

139.  

44528/18

Lodged on

18/09/2018

Enrik DARRAGJATI

Regjina ÇOBA

Karolina DARRAGJATI

Irma GECI

Klorinda RROTA

Zef GURAZIU

Marina LACUKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 245 of 22 June 2012 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 6,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision, expect for decision no. 247 of 22 June 2012.

Viktor Gumi

By decision no. 246 of 22 June 2012 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 4,500 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 247 of 22 June 2012 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 280,000 sq. m, of which 270,390 sq. m was restored and the remaining 9,610 sq. m would be compensated.

By decision no. 1127 of 6 October 2011 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,424 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 1128 of 6 October 2011 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 97 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 3349 of 9 October 2014 the Tirana Court of Appeal, quashing the Property Agency decision no. 518 of 29 October 2012, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 18,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

140.  

45151/18

Lodged on

12/09/2018

Dorinka DEMIRI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

The applicant complains about the non-enforcement of the remainder of the Tirana Commission decision no. 1046 of 30 December 1994, which was not the subject of this Court’s judgment in the case of Siliqi and Others v. Albania [Committee] (nos. 37295/05 and 4228/05, 10 March 2015 – see also row no. 144 below).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Paulin Paplekaj

By decision no. 316 of 15 November 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 2,313 sq. m.

141.  

49997/18

Lodged on

22/10/2018

Klorinda RROTA

Rita SHIROKA

Geti VELO

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 435 of 25 May 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 343 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. In 2013 the applicants received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Viktor Gumi

By decision no. 377 of 18 March 1994 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,276.14 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law. It further recognised their right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation. In 2013 the applicants received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

142.  

50177/18

Lodged on

17/10/2018

Pjetër RODIQI

Analiza STRAZIMIRI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 299 of 30 October 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,212 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Andrea Saccucci

143.  

59207/18

Lodged on

12/12/2018

Arben BARONI

Zana HARXHI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 383 of 4 May 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,516 sq. m, of which 145 sq. m were restored and the remaining 1,371 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The applicants submitted that the ATP had carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Viktor Gumi

By decision no. 616 of 4 January 1996 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decisions no. 1332 of 28 March 1995 and no. 383 of 4 May 1994, restored the applicants 1,232 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 1,1,183 sq. m.

By decision no. 1000 of 29 May 1996 the Tirana Commission restored the applicants 4.8 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 6.3 sq. m.

By decision no. 1001 of 29 May 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 35 sq. m.

By decision no. 39 of 27 May 1997 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 555 sq. m which was restored.

144.  

5251/19

Lodged on

19/01/2019

Marina SHUNDI

Andrea SHUNDI

Jorita MIHALI

Olimpia GJINO MIHALI

Laura KONDA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

The applicants complain about the non-enforcement of the remainder of the Tirana Commission decision no. 1046 of 30 December 1994, which was not the subject of this Court’s judgment in the case of Siliqi and Others v. Albania [Committee] (nos. 37295/05 and 4228/05, 10 March 2015 – see also row no. 140 above).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Ardjana Shehi Kalo

145.  

6074/19

Lodged on

23/01/2019

Lirije BARDHOSHI

Genti BARDHOSHI

Sonila PAPINOVA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 474 of 3 November 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 960 sq. m of which 297 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Suela Meneri

By decision no. 475 of 3 November 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 172 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 477 of 3 November 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 107 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

146.  

7381/19

Lodged on 29/01/2019

Nirvana NASI

Laura KONDA
Ana TIRANA
Nikolla ROÇI
Roberta TIRANA
Nina GURRA (TIRANA)
Nik TIRANA
Diana KAÇULINI
Alma MIÇAÇO
Irena OROLLOGA
Evanthi MUNGULI
Ileana MUZINA
Lirije KOJA
Kozeta KOJA SMITH
Mihal KOJA
Laura KOJA
Ermira SHUNDI
Darinka DEMIRI SILIQI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 97/6 of 12 May 1995 the Elbasan Commission decided that the applicants were to be compensated in respect of 2,035 sq. m. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 1,880 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision.

Paulin Paplekaj

147.  

17731/19

Lodged on 29/03/2019

Fitnet XHUGLINI

Dhurata XHUGLINI

Meliz XHUGLINI

Bulent XHUGLINI

Marlind XHUGLINI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 59 of 31 May 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 690 sq. m, of which 345 sq. m were restored and the remaining 345 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision

Suela MENERI

148.  

25067/19

Lodged on 03/05/2019

Nirvana NASI

Laura KONDA
Ana TIRANA
Nikolla ROÇI
Roberta TIRANA
Nina GURRA (TIRANA)
Nik TIRANA
Diana KAÇULINI
Alma MIÇAÇO
Irena OROLLOGA
Evanthi MUNGULI
Ileana MUZINA
Lirije KOJA
Kozeta KOJA SMITH
Mihal KOJA
Laura KOJA
Ermira SHUNDI
Darinka DEMIRI SILIQI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 183/3 of 30 June 1994, which related to decision no. 526 of the same date, the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 6,400 sq. m, of which 5,000 sq. m were to be restored and the remaining 1,400 sq. m would be compensated in kind in a tourist area.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of the decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Paulin Paplekaj

149.  

32381/19

Lodged on 07/06/2019

Dielli SHEHI

Ylli SHEHI

Teuta URUÇI

Lumturi KUÇI

Hana Sina

Laureta SEREZI

Aida BEJTULLA

Nermin Habibi

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 35 of 11 November 2005 the Tirana Commission, modifying its decision no. 501 of 27 March 1996, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 103,680 sq. m, of which 49,700 sq. m were to be restored and the remaining 53,980 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of the decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Avni Shehu

150.  

52875/19

Lodged on 04/10/2019

Shkelqim KOKOMANI

Fadile KOKOMANI

Marsen NUZI

Anila PAPA

Pranvera REXHAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 206 of 29 December 1993 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation by means of State bonds in respect of 15,500 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Arben Muka

151.  

64499/19

Lodged on 09/12/2019

Mark JAKOVA

Nikolina BERISHA

Elisabeta BENUSSI

Ferdinand SHAHINI

Rozeta KËÇIRA

Irena BENUSSI

Silva ÇOBA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 347 of 23 November 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 800 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

In 2009 the applicants received financial compensation in respect of 200 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Suela MENERI

152.  

11661/20

Lodged on 10/02/2020

Ibrahim PEJTAMALLI

Xhemal PEJTAMALLI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

On 14 November 2014 the Elbasan District Court, quashing a decision given by the Property Agency, recognised the applicants’ right to compensation in respect of 32,000 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

Atmir Mani

153.  

18563/20

Lodged on

02/04/2020

Lirije BARDHOSHI

Genti BARDHOSHI

Sonila PAPINOVA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 48 of 22 November 2005 the Tirana Commission restored the applicants 1,736 sq. m and recognised their right to compensation in respect of 40,295 sq. m (40,000 sq. m having been restored by the Commission decision no. 1268 of 26 March 1995, as amended by the Tirana District Court decision no. 1585 of 21 October 1997).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ appeal against the ATP decision was rejected by the Administrative Court of Appeal.

Suela MENERI

154.  

18582/20

Lodged on

06/04/2020

Lirije DERHEMI

Sezai TURKU

Paqize MULLABRAHIMI

Flutura CANKJA

Mimoza FRASHËRI

Astrit TURKU

Florinda BAZO

Genc AGALLIU

Shkëlqim TURKU

Edlira TURKU

Alban TURKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 335 of 14 November 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 15,000 sq. m, of which 4,137 sq. m were restored and 10,763 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP, following the financial evaluation of the decision, decided that the applicants were deemed to have been compensated.

Suela MENERI

155.  

22859/20

Lodged on

17/01/2020

Skënder ÇOÇOLI

Florinda KOVAÇI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

Pursuant to Article 388 et al. of the Code of Civil Procedure, in 1994 the applicants obtained three separate court decisions acknowledging the existence of a legal fact that their ancestors used to own certain properties (vendim vërtetimi fakti juridik). Relying on those court decisions, by decision no. 214 of 21 November 2008, which supplemented the Lezha Commission decisions nos. 34 of 14 December 1994 and 34/1 of 6 June 1995, the Lezha Agency restored the applicants 79,444,000 sq. m and recognised their right to in-kind compensation in respect of 2,000 sq. m.

The ATP has not carried out the financial evaluation of the decision.

156.  

31827/20

Lodged on 13/07/2020

Vasil RUCI

Josif CANGANA

Eftimia CANGANA

Anila KALACI

Liri ISMAILI

Kumrije DULI

Skënder STAFAJ

Vera ALILI

Qemal STAFAJ

Kujtim STAFAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is the same as application no. 69427/17 the details of which have been described in row no. 132 above, was lodged by other heirs.

Please see the details given in respect of application no. 69427/17 (row no. 132 above).

Ramadan Çaço

Table 2

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Article

Description of final domestic decisions

Enforcement details

Represented by

157.  

22372/15

Lodged on 04/05/2015

Ehsen KËLLIÇI

Deniz KËLLIÇI

Suzana KËLLIÇI

Edi Dani

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application, which is a follow-up to application no. 34770/09, as decided in this Court’s judgment in the case of Manushaqe Puto and Others v. Albania, nos. 604/07 and 3 others, 31 July 20122015, has been lodged by other heirs in respect of their shares of land. They complain about the authorities’ failure to pay them compensation in respect of the same domestic decisions.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decisions, and the applicant’s appeal against the ATP decisions is pending before the Administrative Court of Appeal.

Edlira TARTARI

158.  

24081/15

Lodged on

14/05/2015

Sejfulla SURELI

Aishe HYKA

Drita VILA

Sabrie ÇAUSHI

Niazi SURELI

Selime CIKU

Suzana BALLGURI

Hava SURELI

Duhie SURELI

Zyra SURELI

Xhevrie SURELI

Majlinda MANIGHETTI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 461 of 8 November 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 70,270 sq. m, of which 10,000 sq. m were restored and the remaining 60,270 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the right to first refusal of some buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Sokol PUTO

159.  

42546/15

Lodged on

20/08/2015

Sulejman XHELEPI

Nexhmije PREZA

Zija XHELEPI

Mediha HIDA[7]

Selim XHELEPI

Florjan XHELEPI

Alket XHELEPI

Enver XHELEPI

Naime XHELEPI

Aferdita VARVARICA

Hava KUSI

Nafije KODRA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 536 of 8 September 2011 the Property Agency, modifying the Tirana Commission no. 833 of 5 April 1996, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 23,000 sq. m, of which 12,106.1 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying a total of 2,217.3 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela MENERI

160.  

54397/15

Lodged on

26/10/2015

Franko KOVAÇI

Zef KOVAÇI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 238 of 27 September 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 990 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

161.  

57873/15

Lodged on

18/11/2015

Shkelqim CANI

Mustafa CANI

Vjollca VARGU (née CANI)

Jalldyz GRIPSHI (née CANI)

Pranvera SEJDINI (née CANI)

Manushaqe EKMEKÇIU (née CANI)

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 93 of 15 November 1995 the Peqin Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 5,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

162.  

61015/15

Lodged on

03/12/2015

Zef KOVAÇI

Franko KOVAÇI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 731 of 16 October 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 960 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

163.  

873/16

Lodged on

14/12/2015

Minerva KOTHERJA

Xhemil GJERGJI

Ferzilet SARJA

Zedlir BYLYKBASHI

Armand BYLYKBASHI

Myzejen CAKU

Ermira GARUNJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 10/1 of 29 October 1998 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 32,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

164.  

880/16

Lodged on

24/12/2015

Lila KARAJ

Fatime SHINGJERGJI

Engjellushe QOSHKU

Isuf KARAJ

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 302/2 of 8 September 1995 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 9,700 sq. m which would be compensated in State bonds in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Administrative Court of Appeal.

Endri KOTHERJA

165.  

887/16

Lodged on

23/12/2015

Fatmir HARUNAJ

Lumturi HARUNAJ BAJRAMI

Engjellush HARUNAJ

Fatosh HARUNAJ

Mevlan HARUNAJ

Shkelqim HARUNAJ

Pullumb HARUNAJ

Genci HARUNAJ

Elisabeta HARUNAJ VREKAJ

Donika HARUNAJ PJETRI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 149 of 29 May 2003 the Vlora Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 250 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

166.  

1376/16

Lodged on

17/12/2015

Hava KRASNIQI

Nexhmije SALIU (DULA)

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 197 of 30 August 1996 the Kavaja Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 4,000 sq. m which would be compensated by property of the same kind in a tourist area (kompensohet me sipërfaqe ekuivalente në zonë turistike).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Administrative Court of Appeal.

Endri KOTHERJA

167.  

3821/16

Lodged on

30/12/2015

Gezim PETI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 704 of 29 September 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 24,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicant’s cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

168.  

4250/16

Lodged on

04/01/2016

Altin GJATA

Mustafa ARAPI

Osman ARAPI

Minerva KOTHERJA

Xhemil GJERGJI

Ferzilet SARJA

Zedlir BYLYKBASHI

Armand BYLYKBASHI

Myzejen CAKU

Ermira GARUNJA

Myzejen BYLYKBASHI

Qazim BYLYKBASHI

Enerjeta MALKJA

Agron GJATA

Zegjine PEQINI GJEVORI

Halime GJATA

Rudina GJATA

Adela GJATA

Engjellushe DHIMITRI

Bukurosh GJATA

Myrteza KARDHASHI

Hysen KARDHASHI

Suzana BAKALLI

Burbuqe GARUNJA

Flora SPAHIU

Shejnaz KARDHASHI

Makbule SAMARXHIU

Rajmonda SHEHETILA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 381/2 of 16 September 1994 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 590 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of both decisions, and the applicants’ appeal against the ATP decisions is pending before the Administrative Court of Appeal. The applicants submitted that the court has stayed the proceedings without providing any reasons relating to such a stay of the proceedings.

Endri KOTHERJA

By decision no. 381/4 of 21 September 1994 the Elbasan Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 64 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

169.  

8595/16

Lodged on

05/02/2016

Odin LIBOHOVA

Mimoza LIBOHOVA

Silven LIBOHOVA

Erval LIBOHOVA

Seres TURKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 353 of 9 December 2008 the Tirana Property Agency, modifying the Tirana Commission decision no. 434 of 6 February 1995, recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 102,247 sq. m, of which 17,905 sq. m were restored and the remaining 82,894 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It further recognised the right to first refusal of some buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decisions, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Andrea Saccucci

170.  

18017/16

Lodged on

28/03/2016

Selman ÇOMO

Behixhe KAZAZI

Bekim ÇOMO

Trim ÇOMO

Alije STOJANI

Ilir ÇOMO

Jeta VYSHKA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 24 of 3 September 1999 the Gjirokastër Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 4,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

171.  

22009/16

Lodged on

28/03/2016

Selman ÇOMO

Behixhe KAZAZI

Bekim ÇOMO

Trim ÇOMO

Alije STOJANI

Ilir ÇOMO

Jeta VYSHKA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 467 of 17 October 1997 the Gjirokastër Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 2,148 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

172.  

24962/16

Lodged on

29/04/2016

Fatma BUKMISHI

Abdulla BUKIMISHI

Ramazan BUKIMISHI

Naile BUKIMISHI

Fatmir BUKIMISHI[8]

Florinda BUKIMISHI

Ermela LEKA

Ilirjana PRUSHA

Altin AHMATAS

Silvana KALLUSHI

Articles 6 § 1, 13 and 14 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 195 of 6 May 1997 given by the Durrës Commission, as amended by court decisions given in 2002 and 2003 as well as the Property Agency decision no. 374 of 26 December 2007, the applicants were restored 15,786 sq. m and they would be compensated in respect of 17,036 sq. m. Furthermore, the decision recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of some buildings occupying 6,250 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the Durrës Commission decision, as amended, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Elvana Deshati

173.  

26672/16

Lodged on

05/05/2016

Trim ÇOMO

Selman ÇOMO

Behixhe KAZAZI

Bekim ÇOMO

Alije STOJANI

Ilir ÇOMO

Jeta VYSHKA

Fete ÇABEJ

Saide SHEHU

Afërdita KOKA

Dhurata MINERALI

Ezine GJOLEKA

Vedat ÇOMO

Munir ÇOMO

Rahmi ÇOMO

Bashkim ÇOMO

Durim ÇOMO

Dodona KASMI

Shunqufet SHEHU

Feraset PETANI

Ixhlal AVDO

Shaniko XHELAJ

Afrim ÇOMO

Vjollca FEMER

Çlirim ÇOMO

Danzike KIKA

Bekim KULLA

Jolldez KULLA

Betarice RUHI

Krenar RUHI

Perlat RUHI

Kujtim RUHI

Briseida MEMA

Diana CUKALLA

Qeriman JANI

Nordi THELLIMI

Mifaret ÇOMO

Valo LATE

Lindor ÇOMO

Zishan MECANI

Vullnet ÇOMO

Artur ÇOMO

Roland ÇOMO

Rezarta ÇOMO

Gazmir ÇOMO

Perika ÇOMO

Antualeta ÇOMO

Shpëtim ÇOMO

Fisnik ÇOMO

Virtit ÇOMO

Përparim ÇOMO

Gjernar ÇOMO

Bujar ÇOMO

Naile KASIMATI

Manushaqe KASIMATI

Fatbardha KUMBARO

Lumturie MUSTAFAJ

Qefajete ZOTAJ

Viktori ÇOMO

Perlat ÇOMO

Agim ÇOMO

Artan ÇOMO

Rajmonda ÇOMO

Gladiola ÇOMO

Merita ÇOMO

Tomorr ÇOMO

Engjellushe ÇOMO

Musine ÇOMO

Virgjinush GJATA

Vitori RESULI

Atdhe ÇOMO

Luan ÇOMO

Mahmudie ÇOMO

Nevila ÇOMO

Ledia ÇOMO

Mynever ÇOMO

Pranvera ÇOMO

Lutfi HAXHI

Qefsere KARAGJOZI

Article 6 § 1 and

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 34 of 15 April 1999 the Lushnja Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 25 hectares of which 1 hectare was to be restored and 15.9 hectares would be compensated by means of State bonds in the amount of ALL 4,452,000 (approx. EUR 35,800).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of both decisions, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decisions is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

174.  

27507/16

Lodged on

13/05/2016

By decision no. 2 of 5 April 1996 the Gjirokastër Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 70,000 sq. m which would be compensated by means of State bonds in the amount of ALL 1,470,000 (approx. EUR 11,821). It further recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings in the event of privatisation.

175.  

52909/16

Lodged on

01/09/2016

Nexhmije SALIU (née DULA)

Hava KRASNIQI

Article 6 § 1 and

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 50 of 1 November 1994 the Kavaja Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,685 sq. m which would be compensated by property of the same kind in a tourist area (kompensohet me sipërfaqe ekuivalente në zonë turistike).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Administrative Court of Appeal.

Endri KOTHERJA

176.  

54698/16

Lodged on

13/09/2016

Ali SULA

Pranvera KARAPICI

Zana SHAMI

Sabire GABECI

Admand SULA

Article 6 § 1 and

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 430 of 24 May 1994 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 22,072.4 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri KOTHERJA

177.  

27133/17

Lodged on

05/04/2017

Uran DRAGONI

Articles 6 § 1, 13 and 14 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1050 of 30 December 1994 the Tirana Commission, modifying and supplementing its decision no. 426 of 25 May 1994, recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 24,240 sq. m, of which 2,062 sq. m were restored and the remaining 22,178 sq. m would be compensated by means of State bonds. It also recognised the applicant’s right to first refusal of some buildings occupying 10,980 sq. m of the plot of land to be compensated in the event of privatisation

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision and the proceedings concerning the amount of compensation are pending before the Supreme Court.

Elvana Deshati

178.  

32114/17

Lodged on

24/04/2017

Besnik GUGLIETTI

Articles 6 § 1, 13 and 14 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 195 of 6 May 1997, as supplemented by decision no. 374 of 26 December 2007, the Durrës Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 40,000 sq. m, of which 22,964 sq. m were restored and the remaining 17,036sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicant’s cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Elvana DESHATI

179.  

39827/18

Lodged on

17/08/2018

Vediha SHTRAZA

Mimoza HADO

Ardiana KACERJA

Manjola XHIKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 163 of 7 July 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 879.5 sq. m, of which 52 sq. m were restored and the remaining 827.5 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. Also, it recognised the right to first refusal of some buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decisions, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela Meneri

180.  

41256/18

Lodged on

28/08/2018

Nine SHLLAKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 201 of 30 August 1995 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s right to compensation in respect of 855.14 sq. m in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicant’s cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela Meneri

181.  

41462/18

Lodged on

29/08/2018

Agim KOÇILLARI

Hysen KOÇILLARI

Proveta SADIKU

Hane LIKJA

Nexhmije XHAFA

Mitat MANOKU

Hekurije LLUPO

Myfarete SOLLAKU

Tiko TOPI

Fildus BEQIRI

Violeta KUQI

Natasha MANOKU

Hajri MANOKU

Mimoza BEQIRI

Dhimitër MANOKU

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 63 of 31 March 1994 the Lushnja Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 5,000 sq. m which would be compensated by means of State bonds. Also, it recognised the right to first refusal of some buildings in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela Meneri

182.  

46045/18

Lodged on

27/09/2018

Marjana HOXHA

Engjëllushe BASHA

Besim HOXHA

Ylli HOXHA

Florian HOXHA

Marsida SUVARIJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 455 of 16 February 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 155 sq. m, of which 20 sq. m were restored and the remaining 135 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela Meneri

183.  

46053/18

Lodged on

27/09/2018

Shehrjare SESERI

Nafije SESERI

Osman PATORI

Roland PATORI

Aida MARTIRO

Lulzim SESERI

Ilira TASHO

Ervin PATORI

Mirjeta PATORI

Rudina SESERI

Elvana MYRTA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 705 of 15 September 1994 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 430 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela Meneri

184.  

18499/19

Lodged on

04/04/2019

Genc DRINI

Bardhyl DRINI

Karolina DRINI

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 452 of 12 February 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 799.16 sq. m, of which 190 sq. m were restored and the remaining 609.19 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela MENERI

185.  

25065/19

Lodged on

02/05/2019

Muhamet ZAJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 60 of 7 March 1997 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 88,860 sq. m which would be compensated in State bonds.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela MENERI

186.  

11666/20

Lodged on

12/02/2020

Shkelqim FORTUZI

Agron FORTUZI

Bukurije DOMI (FORTUZI)

Fiqirete DANAJ (FORTUZI)

Ilir FORTUZI

Qazim FORTUZI

Sherif FORTUZI

Zelije GJUZI (FORTUZI)

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

Pursuant to Article 388 et al. of the Code of Civil Procedure, in 1996 the applicants obtained a court decision acknowledging the existence of a legal fact that their ancestors used to own certain properties (vendim vërtetimi fakti juridik). Relying on that court decision, on 4 June 2010 the Durrës Property Agency recognised their inherited property rights to 465,000 sq. m and their right to compensation in respect of 447,000 sq. m. That decision became final on 18 July 2012.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Andrea SACCUCCI

187.  

14853/20

Lodged on

08/03/2020

Fadil KASMI

Articles 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 169 of 14 October 2008 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 10,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision, and the applicant’s cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Brikena KASMI

By decision no. 170 of 14 October 2008 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 8,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

By decision no. 187 of 15 August 2011 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 7,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

188.  

14854/20

Lodged on

12/03/2020

By decision no. 149 of 26 September 2008 the Durrës Commission recognised the applicant’s inherited property rights to 53,000 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicant’s cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

189.  

18568/20

Lodged on

01/04/2020

Siri PETRELA

Alide JARECI

Edvar AGALLIU

Aida VISARI

Genci JASA

Ani JASA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 576 of 24 May 1996 the Tirana Commission recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 47,500 sq. m, of which 26,000 sq. m were restored and 17,280 sq. m would be compensated in accordance with the law. It also recognised the applicants’ right to first refusal of certain buildings occupying 3,542 sq. m in the event of privatisation.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Administrative Court of Appeal.

Suela MENERI

190.  

18573/20

Lodged on

01/04/2020

Eliana BABOCI

Shkendi SELENICA

Zana SELENICA

Taras BEGEJA

Bujar BEGEJA

Dritan SAKO

Elira SELENICA

Gentian SAKO

Helidon SELENICA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 1326 of 24 November 2011 the Property Agency recognised the applicants’ inherited property rights to 1,055 sq. m which would be compensated in accordance with the law.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeal against the ATP decision is pending before the Supreme Court.

Also, the applicants’ appeals against other implementing decisions adopted by the Government are pending before the domestic courts.

Suela MENERI

191.  

18578/20

Lodged on

09/04/2020

Dhionisa PRENDA

Apostol PRENDA

Vasilika MOCKA

Liri PRENDA

Alqi PRENDA

Gaqo APOSTOL

Shpresa APOSTOL

Valter PRENDA

Flutura AHMETI

Gjergji PRENDA

Natalia MAGJISTARI

Roberta PRENDA

Vjollca DEMIRAJ

Ilir MAGJISTARI

Elda KASAPI

Anila PRENDA

Genti PRENDA

Mario PRENDA

Flonja PRENDA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

By decision no. 47 of 5 November 1996 the Korça Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation by means of State bonds in the amount of ALL 55,797 (approx. EUR 449) in respect of 9,000 sq. m.

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of each decision, and the applicants’ cassation appeals against the ATP decision are pending before the Supreme Court.

Suela MENERI

By decision no. 1409 of 23 May 1997 the Korça Commission recognised the applicants’ right to compensation by means of State bonds in respect of
8,000 sq. m.

192.  

21585/20

Lodged on 24/04/2020

Minerva KOTHERJA

Articles 6 § 1 and 13 as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

This application is the same as application no. 70211/13 which was declared inadmissible by the Court in its decision in the case of Gjergji and Others v. Albania ((dec.) [Committee] (no. 13618/10 and 76 other applications, 8 September 2020).

The ATP has carried out the financial evaluation of the domestic decision, and the applicant’s cassation appeal against the ATP decision would appear to be pending before the Supreme Court.

Endri Kotherja

[1] As substituted by her heirs: Ema DAJA, Artur DAJA and Aida REPISHTI

[2] As substituted by his heirs: Elida KOTHERJA, Elvis KOTHERJA and Dored KOTHERJA

[3] As substituted by his heirs: Julian KURTI, Shefikat KURTI and Glenda KURTI 

[4] As substituted by her heirs: Bedar LLAGAMI and Etleva BELIU 

[5] As substituted by her heirs: Ilir LLACI, Kosta LLACI, Nexhmi LLACI and Ruzhdi LLACI

[6] As substituted by his heirs: Deshira LULI, Shpetim LULI and Etleva MECE 

[7]  As substituted by her heirs: Miranda HIDA and Server HIDA

[8] As substituted by his heirs: Zana BUKMISHI, Fatma BUKMISHI, Florinda BUKMISHI and Ilirjana PRUSHA

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy