LAZIĆ proti Srbsku

SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 51204/20
Jasmina LAZIĆ
against Serbia

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 2 June 2022 as a Committee composed of:

Jovan Ilievski, President,
Gilberto Felici,
Diana Sârcu, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 August 2020,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases, and the applicant’s heir’s reply to this declaration,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant’s details and information relevant to the application are set out in the appended table.

The applicant was represented by Mr Aleksić, a lawyer practising in Niš.

The applicant died on 23 August 2020. The Government accepted her husband, Mr Mile Lazić, as her legal heir.

The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning the non-enforcement of a domestic decision given against a socially/State-owned company were communicated to the Serbian Government (“the Government”).

After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government submitted a declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the application.

The Government acknowledged the non-enforcement of a domestic decision given against a socially/State-owned company. They offered to pay the applicant the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The Government also undertook to ensure the enforcement of the domestic decision under consideration within the same three-month period, and to pay any costs of the domestic enforcement proceedings.

The payment and the enforcement of the domestic decision will constitute the final resolution of the case.

The applicant’s heir informed the Court that he agreed to the terms of the declaration.

THE LAW

The Court takes note of the death of the applicant and of the wish of her husband to pursue the proceedings. The Court reiterates that where an applicant dies during the examination of a case his or her heirs may in principle pursue the application on his or her behalf (see Ječius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 41, ECHR 2000-IX; Shiryayeva v. Russia, no. 21417/04, §§ 8-9, 13 July 2006; and Horváthová v. Slovakia, no. 74456/01, § 26, 17 May 2005). Nothing suggests that the rights the applicant sought to protect through the Convention mechanism were eminently personal and non-transferable (see Malhous v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 33071/96, 12 July 2001). The Government did not contend that Mr Lazić has standing to pursue the case. Therefore, the Court considers that the applicant’s husband has a legitimate interest in pursuing the application.

The Court further finds that, following the applicant’s heir’s express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government, the case should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties.

It therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify the continued examination of the application.

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides that Mr Lazić has standing to continue the proceedings in his late wife’s stead;

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.

Done in English and notified in writing on 23 June 2022.

Viktoriya Maradudina Jovan Ilievski
Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

(non-enforcement of domestic decisions given against socially/State-owned company)

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

[2] Less any amounts which may have already been paid in that regard at the domestic level.

[3] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.