The European Court of Human Rights yesterday notified in writing a judgment in the case of Prodan v. Moldova. The Court held unanimously that there had been: (1) a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on Human Rights; (2) a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the Convention.

Under Article 41 (just satisfaction), by six votes to one, the Court awarded the applicant 11,000 euros (EUR) for pecuniary damage and EUR 3,000 for non-pecuniary damage. The Court further held, by six votes to one, that the application of Article 41 - concerning the failure to restore one of the apartments in the case (apartment no. 8) to the applicant - was not ready for decision.

The applicant, Tatiana Prodan, is a Moldovan national, born in 1924 and living in Chisinau, Moldova. On 14 March 1997, the Centru District Court ordered the restitution to the applicant of her parent's home, nationalised in 1946, which had been split up into six apartments. The court declared null and void the sale agreements concerning five of the apartments and ordered the eviction of the tenants in all six.

On 3 October 2000 the district court decided partially to change the manner of enforcement of the judgment of 14 March 1997 and ordered the Municipal Council to pay the applicant 488,274 Moldovan Lei (MDL), the market value of the apartments which had been sold: nos. 3, 6, 7, 12 and 13.

In 2001 the applicant asked the Housing Division of the Municipal Council to execute the judgment of 14 March 1997 insofar as it concerned the eviction of the tenants in the apartment which had not been sold (no. 8). However, the Municipal Council informed the applicant that, due to a lack of funds for the construction of apartment buildings and available alternative accommodation for the evicted tenants, it could not enforce the judgment.

The applicant lodged a fresh request for the enforcement of the judgments of 14 March 1997 and 3 October 2000. However, the Municipal Council informed her that, due to a lack of funds and alternative accommodation for the occupants of apartment 8, it could not enforce the judgment of 14 March 1997. As regards the enforcement of the judgment of 3 October 2000, the Municipal Council replied that the money would be paid after other court orders had been paid.

On 20 November 2002 the Municipal Council paid the applicant MDL 488,274 (the equivalent of EUR 29,238 at the time) in accordance with the judgment of 3 October 2000. The judgment of 14 March 1997, in respect of the eviction of the tenants from apartment 8, was not enforced.

By failing for years to take the necessary measures to comply with the final judicial decisions in the case, the Moldovan authorities had deprived the provisions of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention of all useful effect. There had therefore been a violation of Article 6 § 1.

By failing to comply with the judgments of Centru District Court, the national authorities prevented the applicant from receiving the money she could reasonably have expected to receive and from having the occupants evicted. The Moldovan Government had not provided any justification for this interference. Finding that a lack of funds and of available alternative accommodation could not justify such an omission, the Court found a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.