HELDENBURG v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC - 65546/09 (Judgment (Just Satisfaction) : Court (First Section)) [2017] ECHR 147 (09 February 2017)

HELDENBURG v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC - 65546/09 (Judgment (Just Satisfaction) : Court (First Section)) [2017] ECHR 147 (09 February 2017)

Applicants did not breach confidentiality in a manner constituting abuse of right of application; compensation for pecuniary damage is based on the difference between market rent and controlled rent for the relevant period, supported by evidence; only documented costs and expenses are awarded.

Citation
[2017] ECHR 147
Parties
Applicant: Heldenburg; Respondent: Czech Republic
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
09 February 2017
Procedural Posture
European Court of Human Rights Application / Article 41 Just Satisfaction Judgment Following Principal Judgment
Outcome
Government's preliminary objection rejected; applicants awarded compensation for pecuniary damage and costs; remainder of claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Rent Control, Just Satisfaction, Confidentiality of Friendly Settlement, Compensation for Unlawful Interference, Costs and Expenses
Human Rights Law Property Law Rent Control Just Satisfaction Confidentiality of Friendly Settlement Compensation for Unlawful Interference Costs and Expenses

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 34 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Heldenburg

Applicant

Czech Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

European Court of Human Rights Application / Article 41 Just Satisfaction Judgment Following Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants breached confidentiality of friendly settlement negotiations
  2. 2 Method for calculating pecuniary damages for unlawful rent control
  3. 3 Entitlement to costs and expenses

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants did not breach confidentiality in a manner constituting abuse of right of application; compensation for pecuniary damage is based on the difference between market rent and controlled rent for the relevant period, supported by evidence; only documented costs and expenses are awarded.

Court Disposition

Government's preliminary objection rejected; applicants awarded compensation for pecuniary damage and costs; remainder of claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Respondent State to pay applicants EUR 4,339 in respect of pecuniary damage within three months.
  • Respondent State to pay applicants EUR 2,774 in respect of costs and expenses within three months, plus any tax chargeable.