The overall length of these proceedings, being approximately seven years and ten months while the case is still pending before the first instance court, is not justified. The appellant cannot be held responsible for any delay, the case is not a complex one, and the conduct of the courts lacks due diligence. Accordingly, the length of the relevant proceedings cannot be considered as “reasonable”.
• Decision No. U 15/03 of 28 November 2003, paragraph 44, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 8/04
It is underlined that the Constitutional Court, in principle, is not competent to review the course of proceedings before administrative authorities but before courts, since the courts are strictly bound to comply with the rules of the European Convention. However, in taking a decision as to whether or not the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time has been complied with, the length of the proceedings before administrative authorities must be taken into account. Otherwise, the Constitutional Court would not be able to take a fair decision as to whether the proceedings were completed with a reasonable time.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 45/02 of 30 June 2004, paragraph 42, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 41/04; the transfer of the occupancy right from the grandfather to the grandson; the violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
The length of the proceedings was excessive in the case related to a trespass action, which lasted more than six years and four months and which was not a complex one. In addition, the proceedings to determine the co-ownership over the real property were relatively complex and took five years, nine months and seventeen days. However, the delays cannot be imputed to the appellant and the courts unjustifiably failed to meet the reasonable time requirement.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 129/02 of 30 June 2004, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 48/04; the length of the proceedings related to the trespass action and the proceedings to determine the co-ownership right over the land
The length of the proceedings was excessive in the case concerning the determination of the house construction cost. The proceedings lasted fifteen years and four months, out of which the proceedings that lasted eight years and seven months related to the matters falling within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. The proceedings were particularly complex but the delays cannot be imputed to the appellant. The Municipal Court in Ljubuški failed to meet the reasonable time requirement within the meaning of Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH and Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 138/03 of 27 October 2004, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 5/05
The labor dispute took seven years and eight months, out of which the proceedings that lasted seven years and six months related to the matters falling within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. The proceedings were particularly complex but the delays cannot be imputed to the appellant. The ordinary courts failed to meet the reasonable time requirement within the meaning of Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH and Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 256/03 of 27 October 2004, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 15/05
As to the length of the proceedings in the case at hand, it is underlined that the proceedings upon a lawsuit for compensation of damages lasted in total twelve years and nine months, out of which the proceedings that lasted six years and two months related to the matters falling within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. The case was not particularly complex. The appellants considerably contributed to the delay and the ordinary court offered a reasonable and objective justification for not completing the proceedings earlier. Accordingly, the proceedings did not exceed a reasonable time.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 167/03 of 30 November 2004, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 15/05
According to the case-law of the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights, in assessing “the reasonableness of the length of proceedings” in criminal cases, the period to be taken into consideration begins to run as soon as a person is charged. In addition, it is necessary to observe the autonomous meaning of the concept of ‘charge’ as well as a substantive and not a formal concept of ‘charge’ (see European Court of Human Rights, Scopelliti v. Italy, judgment of 23 November 1993, paragraph 18). As regards the end of the “time”, the time when the court ended uncertainty as to the legal position of the person concerned must be taken into account. Moreover, appellate and cassation proceedings and the outcomes thereof must be taken into consideration, while extraordinary legal remedies must be ruled out. (see European Court of Human Rights, Poiss v. Austria, judgment of 23 April 1987, A.117-C, p. 103).
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 631/04 of 18 January 2005, paragraph 28, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 42/05; criminal proceedings, a reasonable time in proceedings related to the request for protection of legality; there is no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH
There is a breach of the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time under Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention where the appellant, for six years, has not obtained a final decision in enforcement proceedings in which he demands the enforcement of a legally binding judgment.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 701/04 of 18 January 2005, paragraph 47, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 73/05; a reasonable time in proceedings related to the enforcement of the judgment rendered in labor dispute; the violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
The two months delay in submitting the second instance ruling does not constitute a violation of the right to a fair trial in case where there are no other elements indicating that the delay is incompatible with the requirements of Article 6 of the European Convention or that the competent authorities have failed to take the measures for remedying the situation.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 600/04 of 17 February 2005, paragraph 25, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 42/05; minor offence proceedings; there is no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH
There is no violation of a reasonable time requirement under Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention in cases where the length of the proceedings is affected by a number of factors, such as the judicial reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which resulted in changes in respect of subject matter jurisdiction. Next, the fact is that the appellant stays in the territory of another state and that the communication was made through the Ministry of Justice. Furthermore, the Economic Department of the Municipal Court is overloaded with cases. Finally, the Law on Contentious Procedures was amended so that the appellant had to amend her lawsuit, which also affected the length of the proceedings.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 505/04 of 15 June 2005, paragraphs 30 to 32, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 67/05; the length of the civil proceedings for damage compensation for a violation of copyright; there is no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH
In the case at hand the dispute concerns a royalty payment. In this regard, it was necessary to resolve an issue as to whether the defendant had violated the authors’ copyright as well as whether he had made the royalty payment for work performed by the author upon the defendant’s order. In addition, the amount of remuneration had to be established. In the view of the Constitutional Court, such a dispute cannot be regarded as particularly complex.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 519/04 of 22 July 2005, paragraph 35, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 80/05; the length of the civil proceedings for remuneration of royalties; there is no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH.)
There is no violation of the right to a fair trial in respect of the reasonableness of the length of proceedings in case where the proceedings concerning the royalty payment last sixteen years and five months, out of which the period of ten years and four months is relevant after the entry into force of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the delays in taking the Decision on Merits within the relevant time are mainly attributable to the appellant.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 519/04 of 22 July 2005, paragraph 42, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 80/05; the length of the civil proceedings for royalty payment; there is no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH
There was no violation of the appellant’s right to have a decision on the merits by the Cantonal Court within the reasonable time as the length of 1 year, 9 months and 3 days, which elapsed from the moment when the lawsuit was filed to the moment when the judgment was rendered, was not excessive given the circumstances of the case.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 992/04 of 13 September 2005, paragraph 39, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 4/06
There was no violation of the appellant’s right to have a decision within the reasonable time falling within the scope of the right to a fair trial although the length of the proceedings was 14 years, out of which eight years and eight months were considered as the relevant period after the entry into force of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, since the appellant’s responsibility for taking a decision on the merits within the relevant period prevailed.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 962/04 of 13 October 2005, paragraph 55, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 20/06
The appellant’s right to have a decision on the merits within the reasonable time is violated by the Basic Court as the Constitutional Court took a decision to refer the case back to the Basic Court for a new expedited procedure and that the court did not hold any hearing within a time limit of two years, nor did it take a decision on the merits in the mentioned case, where the length of overall proceedings was seven years.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 1101/04 of 13 October 2005, paragraph 52, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 17/06
The proceedings for cancellation of the gift agreement, which lasted fifteen years and nine months, out of which the period of nine years and nine months is relevant after the entry into force of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, exceeded the reasonable time given that the appellant did not contribute to the delays. On the other side, it is obvious that the Municipal Court misplaced the case file and made delays in ordering a reconstruction of the relevant case file. In so doing, the Municipal Court failed to meet the reasonable time requirement.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 542/04 of 13 October 2005, paragraph 47, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 17/06; the length of the civil proceedings related to annulment of a gift agreement; the violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
The general arguments by the Basic Court, according to which the judicial reform and the case overload caused the delays in proceedings, cannot justify the court’s inactivity as to the appellant’s lawsuit, which was pending for three years and six months. Subsequently, there were other delays in proceedings so that the civil proceedings in the appellant’s case exceeded a reasonable time stipulated in Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 938/04 of 17 November 2005, paragraph 46, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 20/06;
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 1097/04 of 17 November 2005, paragraph 40, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 22/06
The appellants in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in cases where the requirements have been satisfied, should be paid compensation for non-pecuniary damages in the amount of circa BAM 150 per year’s delay caused by domestic courts i.e. the double amount in cases where expedient proceedings are required.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 938/04 of 17 November 2005, paragraph 50, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 20/06
In view of the aforementioned factors, the “reasonable time” requirement under Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention was exceeded as the relevant proceedings lasted more than five years.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 949/04 of 17 November 2005, paragraph 71, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 20/06;
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 490/05 of 9 May 2006, paragraphs 44 and 45, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 77/06
In assessing the length of the proceedings and the objective circumstances for which no decision has yet been taken by the Supreme Court, the court can find no circumstances leading to the conclusion that the delay in question might be of such a nature as to violate the requirements of Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 955/04 of 17 November 2005, paragraph 33, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 20/06
There is a violation of the right to a fair trial within the reasonable time in the case where the procedure for repossession of apartment was not concluded seven years after the request had been filed, and such an excessive length of the proceedings could be entirely attributed to the conduct of the public authorities.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 19/05 of 20 December 2005, paragraph 68, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 37/06
The proceedings for determining paternity, where it is necessary to establish the facts and exhume mortal remains of the deceased and carry out the expert analysis of the relevant material, are deemed to be complex.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 1539/05 of 16 January 2006, paragraph 30, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 34/07; civil proceedings, the complexity of the case associated with the expert examination; there is no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH
There is a breach of the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time under Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention given that administrative proceedings regarding the appellant’s reinstatement into the apartment in question had lasted more than five years. In addition, the relevant ruling was not enforced in the next two years, i.e. until the adoption of the Constitutional Court’s decision. Finally, the competent administrative authorities by their conduct caused the delays in proceedings.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 1070/05 of 9 February 2006, paragraph 57, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 45/06; the proceedings related to the reinstatement of the pre-war occupancy right holder
There is no violation of the right to a fair trial within the reasonable time as the court issued a ruling within a time limit of 10 months to approve the enforcement of claims against illiquid account of the enforcement debtor and as the court, upon amended motions of the appellant, conducted the proceedings and issued a ruling to approve the enforcement by way of seizure and transfer of pecuniary claims of the enforcement debtor to a third person.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 155/05 of 14 March 2006, paragraph 50, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 49/06
The enforcement proceedings which lasted two years and a half until they were terminated exceeded the limit of the “reasonable time” within the meaning of Article 6(1) of the European Convention taking into account the simplicity of the proceedings and the urgent nature of enforcement proceedings, the fact that no other actions were taken and that there was no need to take any other action, the fact that the debtor did not contest the ruling on enforcement and that the appellant took all necessary actions to accelerate the proceedings.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 200/05 of 12 April 2006, paragraph 40, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 68/06
Civil proceedings to determine the labor status are not particularly complex in case where it is necessary to establish the facts on the basis of the public documents presented to the court and examined by the expert in the field of finance.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 1149/05 of 12 April 2006, paragraph 34, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 59/06; civil proceedings, a labor dispute
Amendments to the legislation applicable to the legal situation in the present case do not affect the complexity of the case.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 1149/05 of 12 April 2006, paragraph 34, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 59/06; civil proceedings, a labor dispute
There is no violation of the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time in case where the appellant contributed to the delays in proceedings with her conduct. In fact, the appellant insisted on the expert analysis of evidence by an expert in the field of finance to specify the amount of the claim for three years. On several occasions, the court granted her requests and issued the ruling appointing an expert, the ruling ordering the preparation of supplemental expert report and, finally, the ruling ordering new expert analysis. However, the appellant failed to meet her obligations in respect of the payment of expert fees to ensure the timely analysis. Finally, the appellant withdrew her request without giving any reasons for it and, not long after it, she filed the request again.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 1098/05 of 13 June 2006, paragraph 46, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 40/06; civil proceedings, a labor dispute
The appellant’s right to a fair trial within the reasonable time is violated in the case where the length of the proceedings exceeded four years as they lasted 3 years before the first-instance court and 13 months before the second-instance court. The length of the urgent proceedings was excessive as the case relates to the judicial protection in case of disturbance of possession so that the purpose of protection of possession and urgency of such procedures are justifiably called into question given the fact that they lasted more than four years.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 148/05 of 29 September 2006, paragraph 37, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 9/07
The fact that the civil proceedings were instituted and conducted at the time of adoption of the new Civil Procedure Code and the reform of judiciary which resulted in the procedure being delayed, cannot be attributed to the Basic Court.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 1291/05 of 29 September 2006, paragraph 42, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 9/07; civil procedure, reform of judiciary and duration of proceedings; no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH
Deficiencies in organization of the legal and judicial system of the state, i.e. the entities in the present case, which threaten the protection of individual rights, cannot be attributed to an individual nor can an individual bear the consequences of such deficiencies. In the opinion of the Constitutional Court, the ordinary courts have the obligation to advise the competent public authorities while the High Judicial Prosecutorial Council has the obligation to secure independent, impartial and professional judiciary and establish a professional and effective judicial system.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 1410/05 of 9 November 2006, paragraph 42, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 11/07; civil procedure, reform of judiciary and length of proceedings; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
Regardless of evident tardiness on the part of the court, which contributed to the delays in the proceedings, the appellant’s failure to file a specified lawsuit, that is to fully specify the lawsuit in accordance with the ruling of the court to a sufficient extent, justifies the length of the respective proceeding.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2240/05 of 9 November 2006, paragraph 39, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 12/07; civil procedure, the appellant’s conduct; no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
Bearing in mind Article 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, which provides for the duty of the court to mind that the parties to the proceedings do not abuse their rights and that the proceedings are conducted without delays, it is evident that the Municipal Court failed to fulfill its duty in the present case in a satisfactory manner. The Municipal Court displayed unacceptable tolerance of the plaintiff’s conduct in this case and clearly acted without due promptness.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2554/05 of 16 January 2007, paragraph 87, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 70/07; civil procedure, the court’s conduct; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
Taking into account the fact that the length of the appellate proceedings before the Cantonal Court, in which decisions were rendered without hearings, thus, at the session of the panel, was considerably longer than necessary and considerably longer than stipulated by the law, and taking into account the fact that the appellant’s conduct did not attribute to the length of the proceedings, the Constitutional Court concludes that the appellant’s right to have a decision within a reasonable time under Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 6(1) of the European Convention has been violated.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2008/06 of 8 November 2007, paragraph 81, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 12/08; labor dispute, length of the appellate proceedings, length of the proceedings was one year and seven months; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
There is a violation of the right to a decision within a reasonable time in the event when a proceeding on establishing the employment status, under Article 143 of the Labor Law, took more than seven years and when the appellant had significantly contributed to the length of the proceeding at issue.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 431/06 of 13 December 2007, paragraph 53, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 12/08; the procedure for establishing employment status; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
The fact that the appellant was unable to enforce the legally valid court ruling not even in the part not challenged by the appeal for more than eight years, may be attributed to the ordinary courts, thereby violating the right of access to court, an element of the right to a fair trial.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 1360/06 of 13 December 2007, paragraph 96, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 12/08; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
There is a violation of the appellant’s right to enforcement of legally valid and enforceable court judgments and settlements within a reasonable time, when the courts, within a time limit of three years, regardless of the fact that they took certain actions, failed to keep the proceedings under control, use available legal instruments and remain active during certain periods.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2358/07 of 13 December 2007, paragraph 36, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 27/08
There is a violation of the right to a fair trial in terms of adoption of a decision within a reasonable time under Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 6, paragraph 1 of the European Convention, in the event when a decision on the appeal in which the appellant is a party to the proceedings, takes five years to be adopt and when such unjustified length of the proceedings can be fully attributed to the action of the competent court that failed to state it undertook any measures to improve the situation by resolving pending cases nor did it offer any other reasons that could be considered reasonable and objective justification for such lengthy proceeding.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2780/06 of 17 April 2008, paragraph 25, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 72/08; length of the proceedings on the appeal; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
The period of 11 years in the criminal proceedings against the appellant that was conducted from 1989 to 2006, falls within the competence of the Constitutional Court and thus exceeds the reasonable time limit. The Constitutional Court held competent courts fully responsible for delays in the proceedings that failed to ensure the presence of the second defendant during the trial in the period from 1993 to 2005, although they had appropriate mechanisms at their disposal which proved efficient when used.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2497/06 of 4 September 2008, paragraph 41, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 91/08; length of the criminal proceedings; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
The proceedings on the appellant’s proposal for registration of the ownership right that lasted 18 years prior to adoption of the Constitutional Court’s decision and which the Basic Court in Banja Luka failed to substantiate, did not meet the “reasonableness” requirement under Article 6, paragraph 1 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2706/06 of 14 October 2008, paragraph 41, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 99/08; change of the case-law of the Constitutional Court of BiH regarding admissibility of appeals relating to the registration of the ownership right, finding such appeals ratione materiae compatible with the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
The Constitutional Court concludes that despite the fact that the appellants may contribute to the protraction of the proceedings to a certain extent, the court which has the role to effectively control the proceedings has decisive and the most important role. The Constitutional Court notes that the European Court of Human Rights, in its decision Uljar and Others v. Croatia (see, ECtHR, Uljar v. Croatia, Application no. 32668/02 of 8 March 2007), concluded that the ordinary courts had to control the proceeding effectively as they decide how to conduct the proceedings, in particular, which evidence to present and how to assess the acts or omissions of the parties, while bearing in mind all procedural requirements guaranteed by Article 6(1) of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2531/06 of 26 February 2009, paragraphs 54 and 59, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 50/09; the length of the contentious proceedings for compensation for damage; a violation of Article 6 and of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH with regards to the adoption of a decision within the reasonable time-limit established
The administrative authorities as the Law on Administrative Disputes (Article 22) allowed the appellant to file an appeal or a lawsuit for silence of administration if he held that the decision on his claim or appeal was not adopted within the prescribed time-limit; however, he failed to do so, as it follows from the case-file.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 12/07 of 15 April 2009, paragraph 28, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 50/09; the length of the administrative proceedings wherein the appellant contributed to the excessive length of a segment of the proceedings as he failed to file a lawsuit for silence of administration; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2046/07 of 17 September 2009, paragraph 26, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 99/09; a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of BiH established
