Scribd
Upload
99 views2 pages

ECHR Judgment: Ionescu v. Romania

The European Court of Human Rights issued a judgment concerning the unlawful nationalization of property by the former communist regime in Romania. The court ruled that 34 French, German, and Romanian nationals were unable to recover possession of properties nationalized between 1994 and 2008, despite court decisions acknowledging their ownership, or receive compensation. This violated their right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The court awarded the applicants financial compensation detailed in an annex to the judgment.

Uploaded by

Papasima
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
99 views2 pages

ECHR Judgment: Ionescu v. Romania

The European Court of Human Rights issued a judgment concerning the unlawful nationalization of property by the former communist regime in Romania. The court ruled that 34 French, German, and Romanian nationals were unable to recover possession of properties nationalized between 1994 and 2008, despite court decisions acknowledging their ownership, or receive compensation. This violated their right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The court awarded the applicants financial compensation detailed in an annex to the judgment.

Uploaded by

Papasima
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

issued by the Registrar of the Court

ECHR 074 (2019)


26.01.2019

Judgments of 26 February 2019


The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing one judgment1, which is
summarised below. This judgment is available only in English.

Ana Ionescu and Others v. Romania (application no. 19788/03 and 18 other
applications)
The applicants are 34 French, German, and Romanian nationals who were born between in 1927 and
1982 respectively and live mostly in Romania.
The case concerned the nationalisation of the applicants’ property by the former communist regime.
Between 1994 and 2008 the applicants obtained final court decisions finding that the nationalisation
by the former communist regime of their properties had been unlawful and that they had never
ceased to be the legitimate owners of those properties. Despite the fact that their title deeds were
not disputed, the applicants were not able to recover possession of their properties, as the latter
had already been sold by the State to third parties.
The applicants did not receive compensation for those properties.
Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the European Convention on
Human Rights, the applicants submitted that their inability to recover possession of their unlawfully
nationalised properties or to secure compensation, despite court decisions acknowledging their
property rights, had amounted to a breach of their right to the peaceful enjoyment of their
possessions.
Complaint concerning Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 struck out of the Court’s role in application
no. 20106/04
Complaint concerning Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 raised in application no. 12838/07
declared inadmissible
Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 – in respect of the other applicants
Just satisfaction: For full details of the sums allocated to the applicants in this respect, see the table
annexed to the judgment.

This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,
judgments and further information about the Court can be found on [Link]. To receive
the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here: [Link]/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter
@ECHR_Press.
Press contacts
echrpress@[Link] | tel: +33 3 90 21 42 08

1 Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a
panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and
deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the
Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: [Link]/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)
Denis Lambert (tel: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)
Inci Ertekin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 55 30)
Patrick Lannin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 44 18)
Somi Nikol (tel: + 33 3 90 21 64 25)

The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member
States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.

You might also like