issued by the Registrar of the Court
no. 161
24.02.2011
“the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” and Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following ten
judgments.
indicated, can be found at the end of the press release. The judgments available only in
French are indicated with an asterisk (*).
BENet Praha, spol. s r.o. v. the Czech Republic (application
nos. 33908/04, 7937/05, 25249/05, 29402/05 and 33571/06)
The applicant is a limited liability company incorporated under Czech law which, based in
Prague, dealt in ferrous alloys. The cases concerned the applicant company’s complaint
about the seizure of its assets in the context of criminal proceedings brought against its
former manager for tax evasion. It relied on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of
property) to the European Convention on Human Rights. Further relying on Article 6 §1
(right to a fair hearing) of the Convention, it also complained in particular about the
unfairness of the proceedings concerning its seizure before the Constitutional Court as
the latter did not communicate to it the observations of the prosecution.
No violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
Violation of Article 6 § 1 (in case n° 33571/06)
Just satisfaction:
-non-pecuniary damage: the finding of a violation sufficient just satisfaction
-costs and expenses: 1,500 euros (EUR)
Čaminski v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”
(no. 1194/04)
The applicant, Aleksandar Čaminski, is a Macedonian national who was born in 1956 and
lives in Slovenj Gradec (Slovenia). A civil party to criminal proceedings brought against
five people who were accused of causing him grievous bodily harm, Mr Čaminski
complained about the excessive length of those proceedings. He relied on Article 6 § 1
(right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time and right of access to a court).
Violation of Article 6 § 1 (length)
Just satisfaction: no claim made by the applicant
1 Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month
period following their delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the
Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further
examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final judgment. If the referral
request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention,
judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for
supervision of its execution. Further information about the execution process can be found here:
2 In which the Court has reached the same findings as in similar cases raising the same issues under the
Convention.
