NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

euros) in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant company. Unistar Ventures GmbH, a company incorporated in Germany, holds the seventh place. 1479 The applicant company complained of a breach of the Convention because of the non-enforcement of a judgment, which ordered the restitution of the applicant company’s investment. The Court ruled that Moldova, at the rate applicable on the date of settlement, had to compensate EUR 6,700,000 (six million, seven hundred thousand euros) in respect of pecuniary damage and a few thousand euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage, including costs and expenses. The Moldovan registered company, Dacia S.R.L., 1480 which submitted to the Court a complaint against the state of its registered office, is in sixth place. In this case, the Court again held that there had been a violation of the applicant company’s rights provided for by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. The violations were the result of the annulment of the privatisation of the applicant company’s hotel, in breach of the principles of equality of arms and legal certainty. It ordered that the respondent state was to return to the applicant company the Dacia hotel and its equipment, together with the underlying land. If the restitution of the hotel in question failed, Moldova was obliged to compensate EUR 7,237,700 (seven million, two hundred and thirty-seven thousand, seven hundred euros). The next, and fifth, in the Top 10 is the case of Michael Theodossiou Ltd. v. Cyprus . 1481 The applicant in the present case was a Cypriot registered company. It owned immovable property located near the seaside in Limassol (Cyprus). The decision to acquire this property was given in 1972, but the transfer took place only in 1995. According to the Court, the expropriation proceedings and the small amount of compensation paid more than 30 years after the start of proceedings had violated the company’s rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. The Court also concluded that there had been a breach of Article 6 § 1 because the length of the proceedings of approximately 11 years was excessive. The just satisfaction award constituted almost nine million euros . The Italian limited liability company, Centro Europa 7 S.r.l., obtained the fourth position in the rating. 1482 It was held that there had been a violation of Article 10 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in respect of state authorities’ failure to allocate radiofrequencies to the applicant company being licensed television broadcaster. The sum of compensation was EUR 10,000,000 (ten million euros) in respect of both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages. The bronze award in the top three millionaire/billionaire cases goes to the Ukrainian company, Agrokompleks JSC. 1483 The Court awarded it the total sum of EUR 27,000,000 (twenty-seven million euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, 1479 Unistar Ventures GmbH , cited above. 1480 Dacia S.R.L. (just satisfaction), cited above, § 1. 1481 Michael Theodossiou Ltd. v. Cyprus (just satisfaction), no. 31811/04, 14 April 2015. 1482 Centro Europa 7 S.r.l., cited above, § 1. 1483 Agrokompleks (just satisfaction) , cited above, § 1.

285