A part of apartment with co-occupancy status, which the appellant’s husband moved in without the consent of the owner of apartment, cannot be considered a home within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention.
• Decision No. U 6/01 of 31 August 2001, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 33/01
The appellant did not allege any interference whatsoever with his home, but deemed that he had the right to be allocated an adequate apartment. Thus, the subject of his appeal is the right to acquire an apartment and not the interference with an already acquired right.
• Decision on the Merits No. U 70/03 of 30 January 2004, paragraph 25, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 11/04;
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. U 94/03 of 17 May 2004, paragraph 29, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 34/04;
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 910/04 of 15 June 2005, paragraph 32, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 73/05
The respective premises cannot be considered “home” of the appellant within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention, as the appellant did not acquire any right over the apartment at issue, but she used the apartment with the consent of the occupancy right holder up until the moment the relations between the appellant and the occupancy right holder became unbearable.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. U 17/03 of 17 May 2004, paragraph 27, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 34/04; contentious proceedings for the establishment of the right to unhindered use of apartment over which the defendant is the occupancy right holder
Considering the information following from the court case-file, which the appellant did not challenge, that the appellant did not permanently reside at the disputed apartment, as in 1980, by moving to his family house, he had ceased to use the disputed apartment for good, which he had considered his home up until that moment, the respective apartment is not the appellant’s “home” within the meaning of Article 8(1) of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. U 43/03 of 17 May 2004, paragraphs 27 and 28, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 34/04; contentious proceedings for the establishment of occupancy right
An apartment shall not be considered the appellant’s home when the appellant, by leaving for abroad to work in 1969, in fact ceased living in a common household with his mother, and was neither living nor running errands and attending to his business as usual. That is to say he did not establish sufficiently strong ties in order for that apartment to be considered his home within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 142/02 of 15 June 2004, paragraph 24, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 40/04; the right to transfer the occupancy right after death of the occupancy holder; the fact related to permanent living and occupancy
An apartment over which the appellant lost the status of occupancy right holder and the legal basis to use the apartment according to a legally binding judgment of 12 February 1991, that is prior to 30 April 1991, as a starting point for settlement of all property- related disputes resulting from the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina shall not be considered the appellant’s home.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 85/03 of 26 August 2004, paragraph 27, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 48/04
An apartment where the appellant lived occasionally with her sister, and was at the same time an occupancy right holder over another apartment shall not be considered the appellant’s home.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 238/03 of 29 September 2004, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 54/04
In the proceedings before the Constitutional Court, the appellant failed to submit evidence undisputedly proving that throughout her entire stay abroad she failed to establish sufficiently strong ties to the apartment of her parents, in order for that apartment to be considered her home within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 280/04 of 29 September 2004, paragraph 26, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 54/04
The apartment which the appellant had never moved into, i.e. which she had never lived in nor ran errands or attended to her business as usual cannot be considered her “home” within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 258/03 of 29 September 2004, paragraph 31, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 54/04
The disputed apartment shall not be the appellant’s “home” despite the fact that immediately after the war he tried to return to the apartment, which his ex-wife made impossible, as, even before the divorce, he had founded his new home by purchasing an apartment in Niš, where he has lived and worked and which was undisputedly established in the proceedings before the courts which deliberated on this issue.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. U 121/03 of 22 September 2004, paragraph 28, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2/05; divorce, establishment of new home and pre-war apartment
Throughout his entire stay outside Zenica, the appellant failed to establish sufficiently strong ties to the apartment of his father, in order for the apartment to be considered his home within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 342/04 of 27 May 2005, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 78/05
The Constitutional Court holds that, in the proceedings before this court, she failed to submit evidence which undisputedly prove that after the end of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina up until the death of her mother she was prevented, due to objective reasons or reasons beyond her control, from returning to the disputed apartment and continuing using it together with her mother.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 377/04 of 18 January 2005, paragraph 31, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 40/05
In the event when the appellant, of his free will, moved out of the disputed apartment for work and relocation to another place prior to the beginning of the conflict in BiH and failed to use the disputed apartment thereafter for 14 years, such apartment shall not be the appellant’s “home” within the meaning of Article 8 paragraph 1 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 293/05 of 23 February 2005, paragraph 37, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 37/06
Apartment or a part of the apartment shall not be considered home within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention if “used unlawfully” or if “the person illegally moved in”.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 418/04 of 22 April 2005, paragraph 21, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 40/05; the repossession of apartment on the basis of lease agreement, JNA apartment; there is no violation of Article 8 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of BiH;
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 455/04 of 12 April 2005, paragraph 21, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 22/06; the repossession of apartment; there is no violation of Article 8 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of BiH
An apartment with the occupancy right may not be considered home of a member of a family household if the respective member failed to establish sufficiently strong ties to the pre-war residence (in the present case as a result of a stay abroad).
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 380/04 of 26 April 2005, paragraph 24, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 40/05; the transfer of occupancy right to a child; there is no violation of Article 8 of the European Convention
If agreement on the use of apartment has never been concluded nor the appellant has ever moved into it, this apartment may not be considered a home.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 477/04 of 27 May 2005, paragraph 34, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 78/05; civil proceedings, handover of the possession of apartment; there is no violation of Article 8 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of BiH
If the appellant had never moved into the disputed apartment or had never lived in it and ran his usual errands, such apartment may not be considered the appellant’s “home” within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 281/05 of 28 June 2005, paragraph 31, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 60/05
There is no violation of the right to respect for home, as the challenged decision established that the appellant did not meet conditions prescribed by law for the transfer of occupancy right from the deceased occupancy right holder to her, so that the disputed apartment is not the appellant’s “home” within the meaning of Article 8 of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 971/04 of 28 June 2005, paragraph 34, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 27/06; contentious proceedings for the transfer of occupancy right
An apartment may not be considered a home if the reason for ceasing to use the apartment was a voluntary cessation to use it and voluntary surrender of apartment for use.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 818/04 of 23 September 2005, paragraph 32, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 3/06; administrative proceedings, the repossession of apartment the appellant left in order to move into another apartment; there is no violation of Article 8 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of BiH
The appellant’s right to home was not violated, as the appellant did not establish a common household on a permanent basis with her mother, the occupancy right holder, nor did she have a legally recognized status of a member of her family household at the time of her death. Therefore, the disputed apartment may not be considered her home.
• Decision on the Merits No. AP 1036/04 of 13 September 2005, paragraph 35, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 4/06
An apartment may not be considered “home” of the appellant, who, as a legal person, is the owner and occupancy right holder over the respective apartment and not the person using the apartment at issue for the purpose of living in it.
• Decision on Admissibility No. AP 769/06 of 10 January 2008, paragraph 18; the appeal ratione materiae incompatible with the Constitution
[…] It is indisputable that the appellant possess the CRPC Decision of 2 September 2003, which confirmed that on 1 April 1992 he was the occupancy right holder on the respective apartment. However, in the opinion of the Constitutional Court that cannot constitute a sufficient argument that would lead to a conclusion that the respective apartment constituted the appellant’s “home” within the meaning of Article 8(1) of the European Convention, bearing in mind all the circumstances of the present case. In that respect, the Constitutional Court once again emphasizes that the appellant of his free will and without duress, primarily because of the nature of the work he performed (military service), severed the ties with the respective apartment and requested the issuance of a confirmation note on the handover of the respective apartment in order to regulate the right to be allocated another apartment (in the area of the present-day Republika Srpska), which is the reason why he gave up the claim for the repossession of the respective apartment. Therefore, the Constitutional Court concludes that the respective apartment cannot be considered “home” of the appellant within the meaning of Article 8(1) of the European Convention.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 292/08 of 29 June 2010, paragraph 39, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 101/10; JNA apartment; there is no violation of Article 8 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of BiH
