COMENDANT proti Moldavsku

FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 802/16
Ion COMENDANT
against the Republic of Moldova

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 18 September 2025 as a Committee composed of:

Andreas Zünd, President,
Diana Sârcu,
Mykola Gnatovskyy, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 24 December 2015,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Ion Comendant, is a Moldovan national, who was born in 1949 and lives in Chișinău.

The Moldovan Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent at that time, Mr Dumitru Obadă.

Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant alleged that his access to court was restricted after the Buiucani District Court had returned on 18 August 2015 his request for a review of a decision affecting his rights, having declined jurisdiction to examine the case. On 19 November 2015 the Chișinău Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the first-instance court. That complaint was communicated to the Moldovan Government and the Government Agent requested the reopening of the domestic proceedings.

On 24 July 2023 the Chișinău Court of Appeal upheld the Agent’s request, reopened the proceedings, acknowledged a breach of the applicant’s right under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, awarded him 1,000 euros (EUR) in compensation for non-pecuniary damage, quashed its decision of 19 November 2015, and retained the case for a fresh examination. The appeal court then upheld the applicant’s appeal on points of law against the Buiucani District Court’s decision of 18 August 2015, quashed that decision, and retained the case for examination on the merits as a first-instance court.

On 16 November 2023 the Ministry of Finance transferred the amount of EUR 1,000 awarded for non-pecuniary damage to the applicant’s bank account.

On 8 December 2023 the respondent Government invited the Court to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention, considering that the matter had been settled at domestic level.

The applicant was informed of the Government’s request to which he did not object within the allowed time-limit.

THE LAW

In view of the above, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine.

Accordingly, the application should be struck out of the list of cases.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Done in English and notified in writing on 9 October 2025.

Viktoriya Maradudina Andreas Zünd
Acting Deputy Registrar President