CASE OF ISAKOVIĆ VIDOVIĆ v. SERBIA
Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Positive obligations;Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)
Alvina Gyulumyan;Ján Šikuta;Johannes Silvis;Josep Casadevall;Luis López Guerra
5. The applicant, a medical doctor by profession, was born in 1967. She currently lives in Celje, Slovenia, having lived in Šabac, Serbia, at the material time. 6. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 7. On 2 September 1997 the applicant and her neighbour P.V. confronted each other in front of their houses following a verbal conflict between P.V. and the applicant’s mother. While the applicant allegedly shouted obscenities at him, P.V. allegedly punched her in the face, causing her to fall down and lose consciousness. The medical records from the emergency ward showed that the applicant had sustained a number of injuries to her head. She was released from hospital the next day upon her own request. 8. On an unspecified date, the applicant lodged a criminal complaint (krivičnu prijavu) in respect of this event. 9. On 16 September 1997 P.V. and his wife brought a private criminal action (privatnu krivičnu tužbu) against the applicant for insult and defamation (zbog uvrede i klevete) and against both the applicant and her mother for making serious threats (zbog ugrožavanja sigurnosti). 10. On 2 March 1998 the Šabac Public Prosecutor filed a bill of indictment (optužnicu) against P.V. with the Šabac Municipal Court for the crime of severe bodily injuries (zbog nanošenja teških telesnih povreda). 11. On 20 March 1998 the Municipal Court joined the two sets of proceedings. 12. At some point in 2000 the applicant lodged a civil compensation claim within the criminal proceedings (istakla imovinsko-pravni zahtev). 13. Between 14 April 1998 and 31 May 2000 a total of thirteen hearings were held or adjourned. 14. At the hearing of 11 January 2000 a medical expert stated that, based on the available documentation, on 2 September 1997 the applicant had sustained a concussion as well as a contusion. She had also continued receiving medical treatment for another two months. 15. On 15 June 2000 the Municipal Court convicted both the applicant and P.V. as charged and sentenced them to a fine and four months imprisonment, respectively, both sentences suspended for a period of one year. The court instructed the applicant to pursue her civil claim in a separate civil suit. The applicant’s mother was acquitted. 16. On 20 June 2001 the Šabac District Court quashed the convictions and ordered a new trial, but upheld the acquittal. 17. On 12 January 2004 a new hearing was scheduled for 25 February 2004. 18. On 25 February 2004 the Municipal Court terminated the proceedings against the applicant as time-barred, while the proceedings against P.V. continued. 19. On 2 April 2004 the main hearing started anew due to changes to the composition of the bench. Following the applicant’s testimony, the proceedings were adjourned for an indefinite period, as the Municipal Court had to obtain certain missing medical documentation. 20. At the next hearing of 18 May 2005, the Municipal Court heard P.V., as well as three witnesses. The court further decided to request the Belgrade Forensic Medicine Institute to give its opinion as regards the applicant’s bodily injuries allegedly sustained at the material time. No new hearing was scheduled. 21. On 19 December 2005 the Municipal Court received the relevant medical opinion dated 16 September 2005. The opinion stated that the attack had caused the applicant severe bodily injuries (loss of consciousness, a concussion and a contusion of the zygomatic bone). 22. On an unspecified date the Municipal Court scheduled the next hearing for 22 May 2007. This hearing, however, was further adjourned on two separate occasions, because of P.V.’s or the trial judges’ absence. 23. On 11 July 2007 the Municipal Court dismissed proposals for the examination of additional witnesses. On the same occasion the defendant requested that the entire trial bench be replaced by another. The case-file was subsequently forwarded to the President of the court for a decision. 24. On 5 September 2007 the Municipal Court terminated the proceedings against P.V. as time-barred. 25. The applicant never filed a separate civil compensation claim in respect of the underlying incident. 26. In 2008 the applicant and her family moved to Slovenia.