European UnionMy property was confiscated by the state and I believe it was disproportionate. What can I do?
You can challenge the confiscation before a national court and, if domestic remedies are exhausted, bring a case to the European Court of Human Rights alleging a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the ECHR.
What the Law Says
The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions is protected across the European Union through the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which all EU Member States have ratified. While states may interfere with property rights for public interest reasons, any such interference must respect the principle of proportionality.
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the ECHR states that 'Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.' It permits deprivation of possessions only if it is 'in the public interest' and subject to conditions provided for by law and 'the general principles of international law.'
Crucially, the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted this provision to require a 'fair balance' between the demands of the general interest and the requirements of the protection of the individual's fundamental rights.
National laws implementing confiscation (e.g., for crime prevention, tax enforcement, or urban planning) must comply with this standard — meaning the measure must be suitable, necessary, and not excessive in relation to its aim.
Statutory TextEvery natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.
— European Convention on Human Rights, Protocol No. 1, Art. 1 — Protection of property
What Courts Have Said
The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly ruled that disproportionate confiscation violates Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. National courts across the EU are required to apply this standard when reviewing confiscation orders.
Established that prolonged uncertainty over property rights (e.g., expropriation without timely compensation) breaches the 'peaceful enjoyment' guarantee.
Confirmed that restitution claims after communist-era expropriations must be assessed for fairness and proportionality — retroactive denial of redress may violate Art. 1 P1.
While concerning privacy, reaffirmed the 'fair balance' test as central to assessing all interferences with Convention rights, including property.
What to Do
Challenge the confiscation before your national administrative or civil court — citing disproportionality and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
Ensure you exhaust all domestic legal remedies (including appeals) within applicable deadlines — usually 1–3 months from the decision.
If unsuccessful, file an application with the European Court of Human Rights within 6 months of the final domestic decision.
Include evidence showing the confiscation was excessive — e.g., value of property vs. severity of offence, lack of compensation, or absence of less intrusive alternatives.
Sources
Not legal advice. This article is general information based on publicly available sources, written for educational purposes. Laws change and individual situations vary. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before acting on anything you read here. Last reviewed: 2026-06-08.