A summary of basic principles
Article 1 of Additional Protocol No. 1 to the ECHR and Article II.3(k) of the BiH Constitution protect only the existing ownership and similar legal status although in principle they do not protect the right to acquire a property.1761 However, Article 1 of Additional Protocol No. 1 to the ECHR includes “legitimate expectations” to acquire a property if they are based on an applicable administrative act or administrative legal regulations.1762 Therefore, the “legitimate expectations” mean that a person can prove that he/she is entitled to the proprietary legal status he/she claims based on a legal act. The term “property” includes a wide range of proprietary interests representing an economic value.1763 This term should not be interpreted in a restrictive manner. Moreover, the notion of ownership includes all property rights which represent an economic value1764 even if they are not classified as civil rights1765 according to the national legislation or ownership rights.1766 A temporary right which has an economic value can constitute property within the meaning of Article 1 of Additional Protocol No. 1 to the ECHR.1767 However, socially owned property allocated for use does not constitute property.1768 Both the legal position in rem and legal position in personam can be considered as property within the meaning of Article 1 of Additional Protocol No.1 to the ECHR even if there is a lack of clarity relating to its existence.1769 As to the in rem legal position, in order for a right to fall under the scope of protection, it may be necessary to prove the existence of just title (iustus titiulus), or the ownership should be based on the permanent indisputable possession and use.1770
Footnotes
U 16/00, paragraph V.b and U 7/01, paragraph 23, with a reference to the ECtHR, Marckx v. Belgium, 27 April 1979, paragraph 50; U 37/00, paragraph 29.
CH/98/1040-A, paragraph 20, with a reference to the ECtHR, Pine Valley Developments Ltd. et al. v. Ireland, 29 November 1991, Series A no. 222, paragraph 51, and Pressos Compania Naviera S.A. et al. v. Belgium, 20 November 1995, Series A no. 332, paragraph 31.
U 14/00, paragraph 30; AP 159/03, paragraph 39.
CH/96/3 et al.-M, paragraph 32, CH/96/22-M, paragraph 34, and CH/96/28-A&M, paragraph 32, with a reference to ECtHR, Van Marle v. the Netherlands, 1986, Series A no. 101, paragraph 41, Pressos Compania Naviera S.A. v. Belgium, 1995, Series A no. 332, paragraph 31.
CH/03/14880, paragraph 29 et seq.
U 16/00, paragraph V.b; similarly, U 12/01, paragraph 28; CH/96/29-A&M, paragraph 191; CH/97/51-A&M, paragraph 58.
CH/98/1495-A&M, paragraph 61; CH/98/894-A&M, paragraph 49.
CH/03/9628-A&M, paragraph 92.
CH/98/1245-A&M, paragraph 72.
CH/96/29-A&M, paragraph 191, with reference to ECtHR, Holy Monasteries v. Greece, 9 December 1994, Series A no. 301-A, paragraphs 58-60.