CASE OF CARIĆ v. CROATIA
Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time)
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Ksenija Turković
4. The applicant was born in 1944 and lives in Petrinja. 5. On 9 October 2000 the applicant lodged a civil action in the Sisak Municipal Court (Općinski sud u Sisku) seeking payment of unpaid pension instalments. 6. On 4 July 2002 the Sisak Municipal Court stayed the proceedings pending the outcome of the parallel administrative proceedings before the Croatian Pension Fund (Hrvatski zavod za mirovinsko osiguranje). The applicant appealed. 7. On 16 January 2003 the Sisak County Court (Županijski sud u Sisku) dismissed the applicant’s appeal. 8. On 5 January 2012 the Sisak Municipal Court resumed the proceedings. 9. On 10 February 2012 the Sisak Municipal Court adopted a judgement and the applicant appealed. 10. On 31 May 2012 the Sisak County Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal and upheld the first-instance judgment. 11. Meanwhile, on 24 November 2011 the applicant lodged a request for the protection of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time (zahtjev za zaštitu prava na suđenje u razumnom roku) with the Sisak County Court, complaining about the length of the above civil proceedings. 12. On 24 January 2012 the Sisak County Court found a violation of the applicant’s right to a hearing within a reasonable time, awarded him 4,500 Croatian kunas (HRK) in compensation and ordered the Sisak Municipal Court to decide on the applicant’s case within six months of the service of its decision. 13. Following an appeal by the State Attorney, on 4 June 2012 the threemember panel of the Supreme Court reduced the amount of compensation awarded to HRK 500. 14. The applicant then lodged a constitutional complaint and on 18 October 2012 the Constitutional Court (Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske) declared it inadmissible. 15. On 19 April 2001 the Croatian Pension Fund, Sisak Regional Office (Hrvatski zavod za mirovinsko osiguranje, Područni ured u Sisku) decided about the applicant’s request for payment of his pension arrears. 16. On 15 May 2001 the applicant appealed. 17. On 13 July 2001 the Croatian Pension Fund, Central Office (Hrvatski zavod za mirovinsko osiguranje, Središnji ured) dismissed the applicant’s appeal. 18. Following the applicant’s administrative action, on 2 March 2006 the Administrative Court (Upravni sud Republike Hrvatske) quashed the second-instance decision and remitted the case to the Central Office. 19. On 8 May 2006 the Central Office quashed the first-instance decision and remitted the case to the Sisak Regional Office. 20. On 18 September 2006 the Sisak Regional Office adopted a new decision and the applicant again appealed. 21. On 3 April 2007 the Central Office dismissed the applicant’s appeal. 22. On 7 July 2011 the Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s subsequent administrative action. 23. On 12 May 2011 the applicant lodged a request for the protection of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time with the Supreme Court (Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske) complaining about the length of the above administrative proceedings. 24. By a decision of 5 October 2011 the Supreme Court found a violation of the applicant’s right to a hearing within a reasonable time and awarded him HRK 6,500 in compensation. 25. The applicant appealed and on 7 September 2012 the three-judge panel of the Supreme Court dismissed his appeal as ill-founded.