The ECHR judgment of 25 April 2017 in the case of Vaskrsic v. Slovenia (application No. 31371/12).
In 2012, the applicant was assisted in preparing the application. Subsequently, the application was communicated to Slovenia.
The complaint on the sale of the applicant's house at a public auction for the execution of the decision on recovery of 124 euros was successfully considered in the case. There has been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
The applicant's house was encumbered and sold from a public auction for half the market value in order to enforce the judgment with a claim price of approximately EUR 124 after the applicant repeatedly evaded payment claims. In the conventional proceedings, he complained of a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.
ISSUES OF LAW
Concerning compliance with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. The interference with the applicant's right to respect for his property was provided for by law and pursued a legitimate aim of protecting the interests of creditors and the purchaser of the home. However, this measure was clearly disproportionate.
However, the Court noted that the amount of debt that the creditor received from the sale of the applicant's house was insignificant (about 500 euros, taking into account interest and executive costs).
The house was sold for half of its market value in the absence of consideration by the domestic court of alternative measures. This happened despite the fact that (i) the applicant appeared to be employed and had a monthly income, (ii) the lender actually at the same time requested performance by imposing seizures on the salary of the applicant and his bank account, and ( (iii) another creditor successfully recovered a much larger debt as a result of the seizure of the applicant's bank account.
While the Court attaches great importance to the provision of effective enforcement proceedings to creditors, in the present case, it has not been established that a judicial sale of the applicant's home is necessary.
In view of, inter alia, the small amount of arrears and the lack of consideration of more appropriate and less burdensome measures, the authorities of Slovenia did not establish a fair balance between the aim pursued and the measures taken in the enforcement proceedings against the applicant.
The case involved a violation of the requirements of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (unanimously adopted).
In the application of Article 41 of the Convention. The Court awarded the applicant EUR 77,000 in respect of pecuniary damage (which is (i) the difference between the market value of the applicant's house and the price attained at the auction, and (ii) the interest) and EUR 3,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.