Search
document

OSTROUSHKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 3666/06, 2728/07, 4304/07, 4305/07, 5677/07, 6198/07, 21606/07, 29731/07, 35568/08, 36841/08, 37123/... • ECHR ID: 001-150406

Document date: December 9, 2014

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 4

OSTROUSHKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 3666/06, 2728/07, 4304/07, 4305/07, 5677/07, 6198/07, 21606/07, 29731/07, 35568/08, 36841/08, 37123/... • ECHR ID: 001-150406

Document date: December 9, 2014

Cited paragraphs only

FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 3666/06 Anatoliy Anatolyevich OSTROUSHKO against Russia and 11 other applications (see list appended)

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 9 December 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska , President, Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, judges,

and André Wampach , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above applications,

Having regard to the decision to apply the pilot-judgment procedure taken in the case of Burdov v. Russia (no. 2) (no. 33509/04, ECHR 2009),

Having regard to the declarations submitted by the Government and the applicants ’ acceptance of their terms,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix.

The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin , Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.

The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the delayed enforcement of judgments of domestic courts delivered in their favour .

By letters dated 11 January 2013 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by the applications. They acknowledged the violation of the applicants ’ rights in connection with delayed enforcement of the judgments delivered in their favour and stated their readiness to pay to the applicants the sums set out in the appendix as just satisfaction. The payments were to cover any pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage, together with any costs and expenses incurred, and will be free of any taxes that may be chargeable. They would be effected within a period of three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. In the event of failure to pay within that 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 the applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the Government ’ s declarations.

THE LAW

Given that the applications at hand concern similar facts and complaints and raise identical issues under the Convention, the Court decides to join them.

The Court considers that in each case the applicant ’ s express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government shall be considered 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) as to the delayed enforcement of the judgment in favour of the applicants.

The Court therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties in each case. It is satisfied that the settlement is 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.

As regards the question of implementation of the Government ’ s undertakings, the Committee of Ministers remains competent to supervise this matter in accordance with Article 46 of the Convention (see the Committee ’ s decisions of 14-15 September 2009 (CM/Del/Dec(2009)1065) and Interim Resolution CM/ ResDH (2009)158 concerning the implementation of the Burdov (no. 2) judgment). In any event the Court ’ s present ruling is without prejudice to any decision it might take to restore, pursuant to Article 37 § 2 of the Convention, any of the applications to the list of cases (see E.G. v. Poland and 175 other Bug River applications ( dec. ), no. 50425/99, § 29, ECHR 2008 (extracts) ).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention as to the delayed enforcement of the judgment in favour of the applicants .

As for the applicants ’ accessory complaints in the applications nos. 35568/08 and 21606/07 referring to various Articles of the Convention, 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 these parts of the applications 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 to strike out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention the applications in the parts concerning the complaints about the delayed enforcement of the judgments in favour of the applicants;

Declares the remainder of the applications nos. 35568/08 and 21606/07 inadmissible.

André Wampach Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application No

Lodged on

Applicant

Date of birth

Place of residence

Represented by

Unilateral remedial offer

3666/06

24/11/2005

Anatoliy Anatolyevich OSTROUSHKO

27/01/1957

Rostov-na- Donu

1,110 euros (EUR)

2728/07

04/12/2006

Lidiya Nikandrovna LISITSINA

07/05/1934

Obninsk

EUR 830

4304/07

11/12/2006

Vyacheslav Ivanovich SHMELEV

30/11/1959

Petrovskoye

EUR 680

4305/07

11/12/2006

Aleksandr Vyacheslavovich KOLOBOV

10/09/1956

Sestrenka

EUR 680

5677/07

30/11/2006

Nikolay Ivanovich KOZYRKOV

28/03/1964

Pokrovskoye

EUR 680

6198/07

11/12/2006

Oleg Vladimirovich KAPCHINSKIY

28/11/1961

Petrovskoye

EUR 680

21606/07

31/03/2007

Nikita Sergeyevich KARPENKO

07/09/1986

Belgorod

Galina Pavlovna KARPENKO

24/12/1958

Belgorod

EUR 693

29731/07

21/05/2007

Valentina Ivanovna BUGAYCHUK

26/01/1947

Petrovskaya

Vasiliy Vasiliyevich BOROVIKOV

EUR 1,452

Tatyana Vasilyevna TROTSKAYA

07/06/1955

Slavyansk -na- Kubani

EUR 1,516

Alla Fedorovna STEPANENKO

01/01/1948

Slavyansk- na - Kubani

EUR 1,489

Svetlana Alekseyevna KARENKO

27/11/1960

Slavyansk- na - Kubani

EUR 1,635

Lidiya Ivanovna POTAPOVA

23/02/1950

Slavyansk- na - Kubani

EUR 1,473

35568/08

22/04/2008

Anatoliy Borisovich BOGDANOV

Pskov

Anastasiya Ivanovna BOGDANOVA

Pskov

Nikolay Vasilyevich SHERSHNEV

EUR 3,738 (non-pecuniary damage to each applicant); plus 55,979.2 Russian roubles (RUB) (pecuniary damage to each applicant)

36841/08

24/06/2008

Dmitriy Ivanovich GOROKHOV

06/02/1952

Moscow

EUR 678

37123/08

28/05/2008

Artur Alikovich SOLONINA

05/01/1977

Norilsk

EUR 2,362

20478/13

21/03/2008

Svetlana Ivanovna FEFLOVA

28/06/1953

Voronezh

Ilya Vladimirovich SIVOLDAYEV

EUR 6,762 (non-pecuniary damage); plus

RUB 3,691.11 (pecuniary damage)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant