## Facts

- In 1972, Stran Greek Refineries (owned by Stratis Andreadis) contracted with the Greek state to construct and operate an oil refinery; the contract included an arbitration clause.
- After restoration of democracy, the Greek government unilaterally terminated the contract in 1977, triggering a dispute over responsibility and compensation.
- Stran initiated arbitration; the tribunal apportioned fault (approximately 70% to the state, 30% to Stran) and awarded damages to Stran.
- Greek courts reviewed the award: the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal upheld it; the state appealed to the Court of Cassation.
- While the appeal was pending, the legislature enacted a special retroactive statute aimed at the dispute that:
  - declared the 1972 contract void,
  - nullified the arbitration clause, and
  - made arbitral awards based on that clause unenforceable.
- Applying the new statute, the Court of Cassation annulled the arbitral award, depriving Stran of the benefit of the prior judgments upholding it.
- Stran complained to the European Court of Human Rights, alleging violations of Article 6(1) (fair hearing and reasonable time) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).

## Issues

1. Whether a retroactive, case-specific statute enacted during pending proceedings to determine the outcome of that dispute violates Article 6(1)’s fair-hearing guarantee and legal certainty.
2. Whether the overall duration of the domestic proceedings violated Article 6(1)’s “reasonable time” requirement.
3. Whether the arbitral award, as upheld by domestic courts, constituted a “possession,” and whether its retroactive nullification and judicial annulment violated Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

## Decision

- The court found a violation of Article 6(1) because the legislature intervened in pending litigation through targeted retroactive legislation that effectively dictated the judicial outcome.
- The court found a violation of Article 6(1) for failure to conclude the domestic proceedings within a reasonable time.
- The court found a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 because the applicants’ claim under the award, confirmed by domestic courts, was a “possession,” and the retroactive nullification amounted to an unjustified interference.
- The court awarded just satisfaction for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and for costs and expenses.

## Legal Principles

- Article 6(1) protects adjudicative independence and legal certainty; legislation aimed at a specific pending case that alters the result of that case is incompatible with a fair hearing.
- A state may enact retroactive legislation in limited settings, but targeted retroactive measures that set aside adjudicated rights in ongoing litigation violate the rule-of-law requirements embedded in Article 6(1).
- A sufficiently established claim arising from an arbitral award upheld by courts can constitute a “possession” under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
- Retroactively eliminating an enforceable award and compelling courts to annul it can amount to a deprivation or equivalent interference requiring public-interest justification and proportionality; imposing an excessive individual burden breaches Protocol No. 1.

## Conclusion

The court held that Greece violated the Convention by using retroactive, dispute-specific legislation to defeat an arbitral award during pending proceedings, thereby denying a fair hearing, exceeding a reasonable time, and unjustifiably interfering with the applicants’ property interests in a judicially recognized claim.


Stran Greek Refineries & Stratis Andreadis v. Greece, 301-B Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1994)