NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

consequently also applies during the stage of execution. The Court noted that the right to court protected by Article 6 would be illusory, if a domestic legal system allowed a final, binding judicial decision to remain inoperative to the detriment of one party. 627 It uses different approaches depending on the identity of the debtor in the execution proceedings. If the judgment is issued against a public body it must be executed automatically, and non-execution of such a decision for a longer period of time is a foundation to apply the reasonable length requirement. If a judgment is against a private individual , Article 34 NGO is required to take further steps before lodging a complaint with the Court, namely to sue the state bailiffs for inactivity. 628 If no other officials of the justice system have been charged with this specific responsibility, it will remain with the judge who gave the judgment to redress the non-execution. 629 There were no precise rules on how to deal with complaints of non-enforcement from the side of the municipality as it is neither state nor private institution. In the case of Qufaj Co. Sh.p.k. v. Albania , 630 the applicant company complained that the decision of the local municipality granting a planning permission to build five hundred flats was not executed. The Court did not require that the applicant company filed a writ against the state bailiffs. It noted that the Albanian legal system affords a remedy in the form of an application complaining of a breach of the right to a fair trial. The company attempted to use this remedy, but the Albanian Constitutional Court rejected the complaint, stating that the enforcement of court decisions is outside the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. In light of this, the Court held that the Constitutional Court was competent to handle the applicant company’s complaint relating to non compliance with a final decision as part of its jurisdiction to secure the right to a fair trial. 631 Consequently, by dismissal of the complaint, Albania breached the guarantees under Article 6 of the Convention. The issue of non-enforcement against a state-owned company was the subject of the case Regent Company v. Ukraine. 632 In the instant case the applicant, a privately owned commercial company, Regent Engineering International Limited, registered in Victoria (the Seychelles) could not achieve execution of an arbitration award made in 1998 by the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry for more than ten years. The judgment remained unenforced on account of an omission by the State Bailiffs’ Service and because of the enactment of a law, which set forth a moratorium on the forced sale of property. In the beginning, the Court analysed the nature of the International Commercial Arbitration Court and concluded that it was a ‘tribunal established by law’, given that it acted in accordance with the 1994 International Commercial Arbitration Act and internal procedural rules. Moreover, the proceedings before the arbitration tribunal were similar to those before 627 Burdov v. Russia (no. 2) , no. 33509/04, § 65, ECHR 2009 and Manushaqe Puto and Others v. Albania , nos. 604/07, 43628/07, 46684/07 and 34770/09, § 90, 31 July 2012. 628 Bendryt v. Ukraine , no. 1661/04, § 18, 10 December 2009. 629 MOLE, 2006, cited above, p. 7. 630 Qufaj Co. Sh.p.k. v. Albania , no. 54268/00, 18 November 2004. 631 Ibid ., § 42. 632 Regent Company, cited above.

116