issued by the Registrar of the Court

ECHR 247 (2021)

31.08.2021

Judgments of 31 August 2021

The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 15 judgments¹:

four Chamber judgments are summarised below;

separate press releases have been issued for six Chamber judgments in the cases of: Karrar

v. Belgium (application no. 61344/16), Galović v. Croatia (no. 45512/11), Associazione Politica

Nazionale Lista Marco Pannella v. Italy (no. 66984/14), Associazione Politica Nazionale Lista Marco

Pannella and Radicali Italiani v. Italy (no. 20002/13), Estemirova v. Russia (n^o.42705/11) and Üçdağ

v. Turkey (no. 23314/19);

five Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been submitted to the Court, can

be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.

The judgment in French below is indicated with an asterisk (*).

Milošević v. Croatia (application no. 12022/16)

The applicant, Milan Milošević, is a national of Bosnia and Herzegovina who was born in 1966 and

lives in Bosanski Brod (Bosnia and Herzegovina).

The case concerns the proceedings following heating oil – which was not legally meant for use as

vehicle fuel – being found in a lorry owned by the applicant in Vukovar (Croatia). Mr Milošević was

found guilty of a minor offence and fined 4,800 Croatian kunas (HRK) for illegal use of heating oil.

Later he was ordered to pay HRK 123,000 in respect of unpaid duties for the amount of heating oil

used.

Relying on Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 (right not to be tried or punished twice), the applicant

complains that he had been punished twice – via the minor offence conviction and the imposition of

excise duty – for the same set of facts.

Violation Article 4 of Protocol No. 7

Just satisfaction:

non-pecuniary damage: 3,000 euros (EUR)

costs and expenses: EUR 685

Vassiliou and Others v. Cyprus (no. 58699/15)

The applicants, Georgia Vassiliou, Vassilis Vassiliou, Maria Vassiliou, and Antonia Kyriakou, are

Cypriot nationals who were born in 1945, 1968, 1967 and 1973 respectively. They all live in

Xylofagou, except for Vassilis Vassiliou who lives in Vrysoules.

The applicants are the wife and children of a Greek-Cypriot reservist who had gone missing in action

during the 1974 Turkish invasion in northern Cyprus. It was discovered 26 years later that he had

Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber

judgment’s 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: http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution - _blank

been executed by Turkish troops and buried as ‘unknown’ in Cypriot-controlled territory. The Cypriot

authorities identified and returned the body to his family in 2000.

The case concerns the State’s responsibility for the applicants’ distress between the disappearance

of their relative and his identification.

Relying on Article 2 (right to life/investigation) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family

life), the applicants allege that the State failed to effectively investigate and provide them with

information on what had happened to their missing relative, and that such prolonged uncertainty

had caused them anguish.

No violation of Article 2

Violation of Article 8

No violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 8

Just satisfaction:

non-pecuniary damage: EUR 18,000 to the first applicant and EUR 9,000 to each of the other

applicants

costs and expenses: EUR 14,356.82 to the applicants jointly

Bragi Guðmundur Kristjánsson v. Iceland (no. 12951/18)

The applicant, Bragi Guðmundur Kristjánsson, is an Icelandic national who was born in 1944 and lives

in Reykjavik.

The case concerns proceedings against the applicant for tax-code violations. Following an audit, he

had to pay a tax surcharge. He was later convicted of major tax offences and sentenced to three

months’ imprisonment and a fine of 84,000 euros.

Relying on Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 (right not to be tried or punished twice), the applicant

complains that he had been punished twice – via the tax surcharge and the criminal conviction – for

the same set of facts.

Violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7

Just satisfaction:

pecuniary damage: EUR 86,250

non-pecuniary damage: EUR 5,000

costs and expenses: EUR 16,800

Kemal Bayram v. Turkey (no. 33808/11)*

The applicant, Kemal Bayram, is a Turkish national who was born in 1948 and lives in Werdohl

(Germany).

In this case, Mr Bayram complains about his loss of ownership of two plots of land he had bought in

1977 in the village of Engiz-Samsun, as a result of the reorganisation of the land register in 1985. The

following year, the land in question was registered as belonging to the Treasury. The applicant also

complains that he was unable to challenge that measure, having not been informed about it.

Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

Just satisfaction:

non-pecuniary damage: EUR 5,000

This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,

judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. To receive