[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> DIMITRIJOSKI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA" - 3129/04 - Committee Judgment [2015] ECHR 502 (21 May 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2015/502.html Cite as: [2015] ECHR 502

[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

 

 

 

FIRST SECTION

 

 

 

 

 

 

CASE OF DIMITRIJOSKI v. THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

 

(Application no. 3129/04)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Judgment

(Revision)

 

 

 

 

 

STRASBOURG

 

21 May 2015

 

 

 

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.




In the case of Dimitrijoski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, (request for revision of the judgment of 15 September 2014),

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

          Elisabeth Steiner, President,
          Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
          Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 21 April 2015,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1.  The case originated in an application (no. 3129/04) against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Macedonian national, Mr Radoslav Dimitrijoski (“the applicant”), on 7 November 2003.

2.  In a judgment delivered on 10 October 2013 (“the original judgment”), the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on account of the length of civil proceedings initiated by the applicant. The Court also decided to award the applicant 2,400 euros (EUR) for non-pecuniary damage and dismissed the remainder of the claims for just satisfaction.

3.  On 3 February 2014 the respondent Government informed the Court that the applicant had died on 20 November 2011 and requested revision of the judgment under Rule 80 of the Rules of Court. With a letter received on 7 March 2014, the applicant’s widow, Mrs Verka Dimitrioska, confirmed the applicant’s death and requested that the Court award her the just satisfaction.

THE LAW

      THE REQUEST FOR REVISION

4.  The respondent Government requested revision of the original judgment given that the applicant had died before its adoption and no heirs of the applicant had requested to pursue the application on his behalf. They

requested the Court to strike the application out of its list of cases or, alternatively, to award the just satisfaction to the applicant’s heirs.

5.  Mrs V. Dimitrioska stated that she had been unaware that she should have informed the Court of the applicant’s death; that she was poor and had no means to appoint a lawyer. She further submitted a decision delivered on 27 November 2013 declaring her the sole heir of the applicant’s property.

6.  The Court considers that the original judgment should be revised pursuant to Rule 80 of the Rules of Court, the relevant part of which provides that:

“A party may, in the event of the discovery of a fact which might by its nature have a decisive influence and which, when a judgment was delivered, was unknown to the Court and could not reasonably have been known to that party, request the Court ... to revise that judgment.

...”

7.  Given the parties’ submissions, the Court decides to award Mrs V. Dimitrioska the amount which it had previously awarded to the applicant, namely EUR 2,400 for non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable.

8.  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1.  Decides to revise the judgment of 10 October 2013 as regards the application of Article 41 of the Convention and accordingly;

 

2.  Holds

(a)  that the respondent State is to pay to Mrs V. Dimitrioska, the heir of Mr Dimitrijoski, within three months from the date on which the revised judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 2,400 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable;

(b)  that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points;

Done in English, and notified in writing on 21 May 2015, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

André Wampach                                                                 Elisabeth Steiner
Deputy Registrar                                                                       President