BAZHENOVY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 41849/04, 21719/05, 3369/06, 3543/06, 31477/06, 13446/07, 15425/07, 19359/07, 47213/07, 1989/08, 166... • ECHR ID: 001-162027
Document date: March 15, 2016
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 8
THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no . 41849/04 Vladimir Petrovich BAZHENOV and Zhanna Grigoryevna BAZHENOVA against Russia and 24 other applications (see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 15 March 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Helena Jäderblom , President, Dmitry Dedov, Branko Lubarda , judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar ,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the dates indicated in the Appendix,
Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government on various dates (see the Appendix) requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases and the applicants ’ replies to those declarations,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
A list of applicants is set out in the Appendix.
The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin , the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicants were parties to civil proceedings that took place in courts of ordinary jurisdiction and in commercial courts in various regions of Russia. These disputes concerned various civil matters such as labour , housing, property and monetary issues. The impugned proceedings lasted between three and twelve years.
The applicants complained, in particular, about the length of the proceedings in their cases.
On the dates specified in the Appendix the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by the applications.
They acknowledged that the length of the proceedings in the applicants ’ cases had been in breach with the “reasonable time” requirement set down in Article 6 of the Convention. They stated their readiness to pay to the applicants the sums listed in the Appendix as just satisfaction. The payments were to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, and would be free of any taxes that may be applicable. They would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. In the event of failure to pay the sums within the said period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payments would constitute the final resolution of the cases.
In their letters received on the dates indicated in the Appendix, the applicant s informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the Government ’ s declarations.
The Court considers that the amounts proposed by the Government should be converted into Russian roubles at the rate applicable on the date of payment.
THE LAW
A. Joinder of the applications
Given their similar factual and legal background, the Court decides to join the applications and examine them in a single decision.
B. Locus standi as regards application no. 3543/06
The Court takes note of Mr Aleksandr Pavlovich Yerastov ’ s death on 21 March 2008 and of the wish of Ms Natalia Ivanovna Yerastova , his widow, to pursue the proceedings in his stead.
On 28 June 2013 the Court received the certificate confirming that the applicant ’ s widow was his legal successor.
The Court has previously accepted that close relatives of applicants who have died can maintain applications that include complaints concerning various aspects of Article 6 of the Convention (see Shiryayeva v. Russia , no. 21417/04, § 8, 13 July 2006, concerning the non-enforcement of domestic judgments, and Horváthová v. Slovakia , no. 74456/01, § 26, 17 May 2005, in the context of the length of proceedings).
The Government did not contend that Ms Natalia Ivanovna Yerastova , the legal successor of her deceased husband, had no standing to pursue the case. Therefore, the Court considers that the applicant ’ s widow has a legitimate interest in pursuing the application.
C. Complaints about the length of proceedings
The Court finds that following the applicants ’ express agreement to the terms of the declarations made by the Government, the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties (see Cēsnieks v. Latvia ( dec. ), no. 9278/06, § 34, 6 March 2012, and Bakal and Others v. Turkey ( dec. ), no. 8243/08, 5 June 2012).
The Court therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties in each case. It is satisfied that the settlements are based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list in respect of the complaints about the length of proceedings.
D. Complaints of lack of an effective domestic remedy
Some of the applicants complained under Article 13 of the Convention that they did not have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy in respect of the excessive length of proceedings.
The Government did not specify their position in relation to this complaint.
The Court takes cognisance of the existence of a new remedy against excessive length of proceedings introduced by federal laws № 68-FZ and № 69-FZ on 4 May 2010 in the wake of the pilot judgment adopted in the case of Burdov v. Russia (no. 2) ( no. 33509/04, ECHR 2009), and notes that all the applicants were in principle enabled to claim compensation under the transitional provisions of the new law (see Palacheva v. Russia , no. 39814/04, § 72, 19 June 2014).
Having regard to the above, the Court does not find it necessary to continue a separate examination of the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention in the present cases (see Zemlyanskiy and Others v. Russia ( dec. ), nos. 18969/06 et al., 13 March 2012, and Pobudilina and Others v. Russia ( dec. ), nos. 7142/05 et al., 29 March 2011).
E. Other complaints
Some of the applicants raised additional complaints with reference to various Articles of the Convention and its Protocols. However, in the light of all the material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, the Court finds that they do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols.
It follows that the applications in this part are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Decides that in respect of application no. 3543/06, Ms Natalia Ivanovna Yerastova has standing to continue the proceedings in Mr Aleksandr Pavlovich Yerastov ’ s stead;
Decides to strike out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention the applications in respect of the complaints about the length of proceedings;
Decides that there is no need for separate examination of the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of an effective remedy;
Declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 7 April 2016 .
Marialena Tsirli Helena Jäderblom Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
No
Application no.
Lodged on
Applicant
Date of birth
Place of residence
Date of declaration and compensation offered (in euros)
Acceptance of the declaration by the applicant(s) received on
41849/04
26/10/2004
Vladimir Petrovich BAZHENOV
06/03/1942
Rylsk
Zhanna Grigoryevna BAZHENOVA
24/10/1944
Rylsk
Represented by:
Ilya Vladimirovich SIVOLDAYEV
06/04/2015
EUR 2,000 jointly
28/07/2015
21719/05
12/05/2005
Vladimir Dmitriyevich ZAKHAROV
11/12/1935
St Petersburg
13/01/2015
EUR 4,000
17/02/2015
3369/06
09/12/2005
Aleksey Petrovich BORISOV
04/03/1965
St Petersburg
Represented by:
Aleksandr Lazarevich LIFSHITS
06/04/2015
EUR 2,500
27/05/2015
3543/06
01/11/2005
Natalya Ivanovna YERASTOVA
29/01/1960
Nizhniy Novgorod
Anna Aleksandrovna MUKHINA [1]
29/12/1985
Nizhniy Novgorod
Yelena Aleksandrovna BAZHAYEVA [2]
05/01/1988
Nizhniy Novgorod
Aleksandr Pavlovich YERASTOV
13/08/1960 - 21/03/2008
Nizhniy Novgorod
Legal successor:
Natalya Ivanovna YERASTOVA
06/02/2015
EUR 1,200 to N.I. Yerastova ;
EUR 2,800 to each of the applicants A.A. Mukhina and Ye.A . Bazhayeva ;
EUR 3,000 to N.I. Yerastova as legal successor of A.P. Yerastov
09/03/2015
31477/06
16/05/2006
Mariya Fedorovna POLYAKOVA
06/03/1956
Pevek
06/04/2015
EUR 3,700
21/07/2015
13446/07
30/01/2007
Aleksey Yuryevich BARANOV
21/06/1973
Vyborg
Represented by:
Tatyana Fedorovna KLYKOVA
06/04/2015
EUR 2,000
09/06/2015
15425/07
23/01/2007
Valentina Aleksandrovna PACHKUNOVA
17/05/1946
St Petersburg
Nina Petrovna PACHKUNOVA
18/02/1976
St Petersburg
13/01/2015
EUR 3,500 to each applicant
09/04/2015
19359/07
26/03/2007
Aleksandr Yevgenyevich PROKHOROV
22/01/1962
St Petersburg
Represented by:
Aleksandr Lazarevich LIFSHITS
13/01/2015
EUR 500
05/03/2015
47213/07
17/10/2007
Nataliya Anatolyevna STEPANOVA
13/01/1948
Krasnogorsk
Konstantin Lvovich STEPANOV
02/07/1947
Krasnogorsk
13/01/2015
EUR 2,000 to each applicant
07/04/2015
1989/08
09/11/2007
Olga Aleksandrovna GRIBANOVA
18/10/1958
Ufa
18/09/2015
EUR 3,000
02/12/2015
16602/08
19/02/2008
Dmitriy Nikolayevich NERETIN
13/02/1962
Tula
18/09/2015
EUR 900
17/11/2015
25210/08
01/04/2008
Igor Yuryevich SVIRIDOV
08/04/1989
St Petersburg
18/09/2015
EUR 2,400
10/11/2015
26895/08
29/03/2008
Valentin Fedorovich KIRICHENKO
24/02/1946
Novoyasenevo
18/09/2015
EUR 1,800
15/12/2015
30813/08
12/04/2008
Vladimir Aleksandrovich VEDERNIKOV
02/12/1952
Kuznetsk
18/09/2015
EUR 2,000
05/11/2015
33928/08
30/04/2008
Viktor Petrovich RYAZANTSEV
13/08/1948
Kaliningrad
18/09/2015
EUR 2,400
09/11/2015
40971/08
31/07/2008
Aleksandr Sergeyevich KOVALENKO
17/03/1970
Ilanskiy
18/09/2015
EUR 2,000
10/11/2015
45315/08
21/07/2008
Irina Aleksandrovna KAZARINA
03/03/1950
St Petersburg
18/09/2015
EUR 2,800
17/11/2015
45521/08
21/07/2008
Maksim Eduardovich MIROSHNIKOV
04/02/1973
Kushmangort
18/09/2015
EUR 1,200
24/11/2015
48888/08
01/09/2008
Andrey Valentinovich TSVETKOV
23/08/1961
Sovetsk
18/09/2015
EUR 2,600
24/11/2015
56777/08
30/08/2008
Raisa Mitrofanovna BUDURATSKAYA
01/08/1946
Svetlogorsk
18/09/2015
EUR 2,000
19/11/2015
61024/08
05/11/2008
Galina Mikhaylovna ZHUBRINA
28/10/1950
Anapa
18/09/2015
EUR 2,100
28/10/2015
7923/09
17/01/2009
Mugallima Zakirovna TUKTAROVA
07/02/1942
Nizhnyaya Maktama
18/09/2015
EUR 1,100
12/11/2015
10510/09
15/07/2008
Valentina Aleksandrovna SKRIPINA
17/08/1934
Anapa
18/09/2015
EUR 2,300
23/11/2015
14356/09
14/02/2009
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich TKACHEV
08/02/1954
Krasnyy Vostok
18/09/2015
EUR 3,200
04/11/2015
18836/09
22/11/2008
Anatoliy Ivanovich PRITYKO
07/03/1958
Omsk
18/09/2015
EUR 1,800
25/01/2016
[1] . In the course of the proceedings before the Court the last name of this applicant changed from Yerastova to Mukhina .
[2] . In the course of the proceedings before the Court the last name of this applicant changed from Yerastova to Bazhayeva .