SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 60/10
Milomir VIDIĆ against Serbia
and 2 other applications
(see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 14 January 2014 as a Chamber composed of:
Guido Raimondi, President,
Işıl Karakaş,
Dragoljub Popović,
András Sajó,
Nebojša Vučinić,
Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque,
Helen Keller, judges,
and Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on 6 November 2009 and the parties’ observations,
Having regard to the decisions of 13 November 2012 to strike the applications out of the list of cases and of 1 October 2013 to restore the applications to the list,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The cases originated in three separate applications against Serbia (see list appended), lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”).
The persons stated as the applicants in the application forms were Mr Milomir Vidić (application no. 60/10), Mr Radomir Aleksić (application no. 77/10), and Mr Petronije Perić (application no. 110/10). They were all Serbian nationals, born in 1960, 1935 and 1953, respectively. Mr M. Jevtović, a lawyer practising in Užice, claimed to represent the applicants before the Court. The Serbian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr S. Carić.
The applications were lodged on 6 November 2009 and concerned the non-enforcement of four final court judgments rendered against a socially/State-owned company (see, for example, R. Kačapor and Others v. Serbia, nos. 2269/06, 3041/06, 3042/06, 3043/06, 3045/06 and 3046/06, 15 January 2008). Enclosed with the application forms were the powers‑of‑attorney dated 15 October 2009 and signed “Vidić Milomir”, “Radomir Aleksić” and “Perić Petronije”. The powers-of-attorney were also signed by Mr Jevtović and stamped with his stamp.
On the basis of signed declarations according to which the Government undertook to pay to each applicant 2,100 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage and legal costs plus the sums awarded in the final domestic decisions, on 13 November 2012 the Court decided to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
By letter of 20 February 2013 the Government notified the Court that Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić, and Mr Petronije Perić had actually died on 1 June 2003, 16 December 2004 and 21 August 2004 respectively, that is before the applications had been lodged.
In his reply of 30 April 2013 Mr Jevtović did not contest that Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić, and Mr Petronije Perić had died before the applications were lodged, but stated that he had been unaware of this fact at that time, because he had represented those applicants, along with many of their colleagues. Since his clients performed construction work in the field, he was unable to meet them all, but asked some of them to have powers-of-attorney signed by their colleagues and to bring those forms to him. He also stated that he had no reason or interest in lodging applications on behalf of dead persons, when he could have lodged the application on behalf of their heirs. In this respect, Mr Jevtović produced power‑of‑attorney forms signed by the heirs of Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić and Mr Petronije Perić authorising him to receive the amounts agreed in the friendly settlement declarations.
On 1 October 2013 the Court decided to restore the applications to its list of cases.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their similar factual and legal background.
The Court reiterates that an application, in principle, cannot be brought in the name of a deceased person, since a deceased person is unable, even through a representative, to lodge an application with the Court (see Yaşa v. Turkey, no. 22495/93, Commission report of 8 April 1997, § 88, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998‑VI). As it is undisputed that Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić, and Mr Petronije Perić had died before their putative representative introduced the applications in their names, it follows that none of the cases here at issue has been brought by a person who can be regarded as an applicant for the purposes of Article 34 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Post v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 21727/08, 20 January 2009). Therefore, the present applications, as far as they concern Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić and Mr Petronije Perić, are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 and must be rejected pursuant to Article 35 § 4 (see Kaya and Polat v. Turkey (dec.), nos. 2794/05 and 40345/05, 21 October 2008).
As regards the question whether the heirs of Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić and Mr Petronije Perić can pursue the applications purportedly introduced in their stead, the Court considers that, because Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić and Mr Petronije Perić had died before their respective applications were introduced, the present cases should be distinguished from cases in which an applicant’s heir has been permitted to pursue an application which has already been introduced. In other words, the heirs of Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić and Mr Petronije Perić cannot pursue the application in their place because they had actually never taken part in proceedings before the Court (see Dupin v. Croatia (dec.), no. 36868/03, 7 July 2009). Finally, the Court observes that the heirs of Mr Milomir Vidić, Mr Radomir Aleksić and Mr Petronije Perić should have lodged applications in their own names but they have failed to do so.
It follows that the applications are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Declares the applications inadmissible
Stanley NaismithGuido Raimondi
RegistrarPresident
Appendix
No
Application No
Lodged on
Applicant
Date of birth
Place of residence
Represented by
60/10
06/11/2009
Milomir VIDIĆ
04/04/1960
Užice
Gospodin Milija B. JEVTOVIĆ, adwokat, ul. Dečanska 7, 31 000 Užice SERBIE
77/10
06/11/2009
Radomir ALEKSIĆ
13/05/1935
Bajina Bašta
Gospodin Milija B. JEVTOVIĆ, adwokat, ul. Dečanska 7, 31 000 Užice SERBIE
110/10
06/11/2009
Petronije PERIĆ
18/08/1953
Bajina Bašta
Gospodin Milija B. JEVTOVIĆ, adwokat, ul. Dečanska 7, 31 000 Užice SERBIE
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy