Skip to content

When the domestic route runs out, Strasbourg remains.

We work with companies and other creditors across Europe whose final rulings against public bodies have gone unenforced. In a few minutes you can check whether yours meets the general requirements to reach Strasbourg.

Does your case qualify?
The problem

Winning a judgment is not the same as getting paid. And breached rights have a court.

Across Europe, companies and individuals hold final rulings against public bodies that are simply never enforced. A court has recognised the debt, but the money never arrives. At that point it is no longer an administrative delay but a breached right.

See how it works
What we do

Claims locked in unenforced rulings, and the route to pursue them.

We take claims against public bodies to the European Court of Human Rights when domestic enforcement has failed.

The process

How a claim reaches Strasbourg.

European phase

We file the application with the ECtHR.

An unpaid recognised debt breaches the right to property and the right to a fair trial. We draft, translate and file the application, and keep you informed of every step the Court takes.

  • Art. 6 § 1
  • Art. 1 P1
Fictitious example of an application file
Application no. 41827/26Filed
Reyes Ingeniería S.A. v. SpainEuropean Court of Human Rights · Third SectionECtHR · Third Section
Domestic decision
STS 3.ª · 12/03/2024
Recognised debt
€12,847,500.00
Legal basis
Art. 6 § 1 · Art. 1 P1
Four-month time limit
Met
For every kind of creditor

Who we work for

Creditors holding recognised claims against public bodies that remain unpaid, and the route through the European Court of Human Rights.

Landmark ruling
ECtHR · 19.03.1997 · Art. 6 § 1

Hornsby v. Greece established that enforcement of a judgment is an integral part of the right to a fair trial.

In this 1997 judgment, the Strasbourg Court held that a national authority’s refusal to comply with a final domestic decision violates Article 6 § 1. It established a principle now central to every non-enforcement claim: the right to a court would be illusory if a domestic legal system allowed a final, binding decision to remain inoperative to the detriment of one party.

Read the analysis

Also in Strasbourg

  • Burdov v. Russia2002Lack of funds does not excuse non-payment
  • Campoloro v. France2006If the municipality does not pay, the State is liable
  • De Luca v. Italy2013Municipal insolvency does not justify non-payment
  • Ališić and Others [GC]2014The State answers for the entities it controls
  • Banca Sistema v. Italy2026Distributing assets among creditors does not justify the delay
See all case law