Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 59434/10

In determining whether this requirement is met, the Court recognises that the State enjoys a wide margin of appreciation with regard both to choosing the means of enforcement and to ascertaining whether the consequences of enforcement are justified in the general interest for the purpose of achieving the object of the law in question (see, among other authorities, Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94 and 2 others, § 75, ECHR 1999-III).

Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 59434/10

It also considers that in the present case there were no additional factors requiring the State to bear any civil liability for Imarbank's lack of resources (see Ali?.ic and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [GC], no. 60642/08, § 115, ECHR 2014; see also Anokhin v. Russia (dec.), no. 25867/02, 31 May 2007 for the factors to be taken into consideration in order to establish such liability).

Auszug aus EGMR, 27.08.2019 - 59434/10

In view of the above and having regard to the need to strike a fair balance between the general interest of the community and the property rights of the applicants, and of all those in the same situation with them, the Court considers that the means chosen by the domestic authorities in reimbursing Imarbank's depositors were suited to achieving the general interest pursued (see, mutatis mutandis, Trajkovski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 53320/99, ECHR 2002 IV, and Molnar Gabor v. Serbia, no. 22762/05, § 50, 8 December 2009).