issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 144 (2025)
17.06.2025
Judgments of 17 June 2025
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 11 judgments1:
three Chamber judgments are summarised below;
eight Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, can
The judgments summarised below are available only in English.
Radobuljac v. Croatia (no. 2) (application no. 38785/18)
The applicant, Silvano Radobuljac, is a Croatian national who was born in 1963 and lives in Pula
(Croatia). He is a lawyer by profession.
The case concerns a refusal by the national authorities to offset the applicant’s tax debt against
amounts owed to him by the State for services he had provided as officially appointed counsel in
several sets of criminal proceedings.
Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the European Convention on Human
Rights, Mr Radobuljac complains that the authorities’ refusal to offset his tax debt against his
enforceable claims was unlawful and that, by instituting enforcement and minor-offence proceedings
against him for failing to pay taxes on time, while at the same time not paying its own debts to him,
an excessive individual burden had been placed on him by the State.
No violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
Revision
The case concerned the retrial and acquittal of two army officers in the 1990s who were convicted in
the 1950s of war crimes and crimes against humanity for their involvement in, among other crimes,
the persecution of Romanian Jews in 1941, in particular the Iași pogrom, which one of the applicants
had survived, and the placement of a high number of Jews in ghettos, which was the case for both
applicants.
In a judgment delivered on 23 April 2024, the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 8 in
conjunction with Article 14 of the European Convention on account of the acquittal of the two high-
ranking military officials previously convicted of crimes connected with the Holocaust, in extraordinary
appeal proceedings not disclosed to the applicants, as Holocaust victims, or to the public, a fact which
provoked in the applicants feelings of humiliation and vulnerability and caused them psychological
1
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: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
