SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 19322/18
Zoran STOJANOVIĆ and Others against Serbia
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 3 December 2020 as a Committee composed of:
Carlo Ranzoni, President,
Branko Lubarda,
Pauliine Koskelo, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 April 2018,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants were represented by Ms J. Mihailović, a lawyer practising in Valjevo.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of administrative proceedings were communicated to the Serbian Government (“the Government”).
THE LAW
In the present application, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the complaints concerning the excessive length of the impugned administrative proceedings are inadmissible.
The Court notes that the administrative proceedings started on 6 November 2009 when the applicants filed an appeal with the competent second-instance administrative body (see Počuča v. Croatia, no. 38550/02, § 30, 29 June 2006). It would appear that the proceedings are still pending almost 11 years later.
However, the Court observes that as regards the period from 6 November 2009 to 26 October 2017, the applicants can no longer claim to be victims within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention since on the latter date the Constitutional Court expressly acknowledged the alleged breach and awarded the applicants 800 euros each in respect of non-pecuniary damage. Although that amount is lower than those awarded by the Court, the Court considers that it is still reasonable in view of the particular circumstance of this case, notably, the large number of applicants and the rather limited stakes involved in the case (see Sinđelić and Others v. Serbia (dec.), no. 7129/15, 29 August 2019).
As regards the period after 26 October 2017, the applicants failed to exhaust all effective domestic remedies as required by Article 35 §§ 1 of the Convention since they should complain again to the Constitutional Court about any further delays (see Becová v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 23788/06, 18 September 2007).
In view of the above, the Court concludes that the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1, 3 and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Declares the application inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 14 January 2021.
Liv TigerstedtCarlo Ranzoni
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(excessive length of civil and/or administrative proceedings)
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Start of proceedings
End of proceedings
Total length
Levels of jurisdiction
Relevant domestic decision
Domestic award in respect of non-pecuniary damage (in euros)
19322/18
10/04/2018
(32 applicants)
Zoran STOJANOVIĆ
1989
Goran ĐORĐEVIĆ
1966
Zoran LEPOVIĆ
1970
Zoran TANASKOVIĆ
1980
Darko VUKMIROVIĆ
1975
Srđan VUKOJIČIĆ
1976
Dejan STEFANOVIĆ
1983
Rade DIMITRIJEVIĆ
1969
Suzana GRBIĆ
1977
Slaviša VELIČKOVIĆ
1966
Milan NIKOLIĆ
1988
Aleksandar BEKČIĆ
1987
Slaviša ORLOVIĆ
1971
Radojko LUKOVIĆ
1973
Živoin RISTIĆ
1971
Slavko ZEČEVIĆ
1968
Branislav MITIĆ
1968
Bojan POPOVIĆ
1971
Jelena ŽIVKOVIĆ
1982
Ivan PREŠIĆ
1979
Aleksandar PETROVIĆ
1971
Slađan MATOVIĆ
1973
Miodrag KOJIĆ
1967
Spaso MLADENOVIĆ
1969
Saša ŽIVKOVIĆ
1977
Dejan RISTIĆ
1970
Novica JAKOVLJEVIĆ
1969
Dragan ŽIVKOVIĆ
1969
Petar PETROVIĆ
1970
Rakić VUKIĆ
1966
Slađan PANTIĆ
1969
Darko DUBOVAC
1968
06/11/2009
pending
More than 10 years and
11 months and 24 days
1 level of jurisdiction
Constitutional Court
Už-2465/2016
26/10/2017
800 euros
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy