LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
Sorry, there was an error communicating with our API.
Try refreshing the page, and if the error persists, please try again in a few minutes.
VIDINEY v. UKRAINE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS
Doc ref: 12623/09, 12716/09, 12718/09, 12747/09, 12782/09, 12788/09, 12794/09, 12839/09, 30410/09, 30420/09, ... • ECHR ID: 001-113106
Document date: August 28, 2012
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 1
VIDINEY v. UKRAINE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS
Doc ref: 12623/09, 12716/09, 12718/09, 12747/09, 12782/09, 12788/09, 12794/09, 12839/09, 30410/09, 30420/09, ... • ECHR ID: 001-113106
Document date: August 28, 2012
Cited paragraphs only
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no . 12623/09 Rina Semenovna VIDINEY against Ukraine and 50 other applications (see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section) , sitting on 28 August 2012 as a Committee composed of:
Mark Villiger , President, Karel Jungwiert , André Potocki , judges, and Stephen Phillips , Deputy Section Registrar ,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the dates specified in the annexed table ,
Having deliberated , decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants are Ukrainian nationals whose names and dates of birth are specified in the annexed table. They were represented by Mr V. Litvinenko , a lawyer practising in Kostyantynivka . The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr N. Kulchytskyy , of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicants are former employees of the State-owned company “ Avtosklo ”. On the dates specified in the annexed table the Kostyantynivka Court and the company ’ s labour dispute commission issued decisions ordering the company to pay the applicants various work-related sums. Some of the court decisions also provided for the company ’ s obligation to pay the applicants compensation for any delay in payment of the awarded sums. The decisions became final but have remained unenforced.
COMPLAINTS
Relying on Articles 6 and 13 of the Conve ntion and Article 1 of Protocol No 1 , the applicants complained about the delayed non-enforcement of the decisions in their favour.
THE LAW
1. The Court considers that , in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court , the applications should be joined , given their common factual and legal background.
2 . The Government submitted the unilateral declaration with a view to settling the applicants ’ cases. By the declaration , the Government acknowledged the excessive duration of the enforcement of the applicants ’ decisions and declared that they were ready to pay to the applicants the outstanding amounts under the decisions and also the compensation sums specified in the annexed table. The Government invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.
The declaration provided that the proposed sums were to cover the debtor company ’ s obligation to pay compensation for late payment under the court decisions and also any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses , would be free of any taxes that may be applicable and would be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement. The proposed sums would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. In the event of failure to pay these sums within the said three-month 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 applicants ’ representative expressed the agreement with the terms of the Government ’ s declaration.
The Court reiterates that Article 37 of the Convention provides that it may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to one of the conclusions specified in paragraph 1 (a) , (b) or (c) of that Article. Article 37 § 1 in fine states:
“However , the Court shall continue the examination of the application if respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the protocols thereto so requires.”
In the light of the applicants ’ agreement with the Government ’ s declaration , the Court considers that Article 37 § 1 (b) is relevant in the present cases. This is in line with the Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov pilot judgment ( cited above , § 99 and point 6 of the operative part) and the Court finds no public policy reasons to justify the continued examination.
For these reasons , the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government ’ s unilateral declaration and the applicants ’ comments thereon;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention.
Stephen Phillips Mark Villiger Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
No
Application No
Applicant ’ s name , year of birth
Date of introduction
Dates of the decisions about the lengthy non-enforcement of which the applicants complain
Compensation offered by the Government (euro)
12623/09
Rina Semenovna VIDINEY,
195016 February 2009
26 February 2001
and 7 February 2002
( 2 court decisions)
1,860
12716/09
Svetlana Vladimirovna KONONENKO,
195416 February 2009
8 April 2003
( 2 court decisions )
1,470
12718/09
Liliya Vasilyevna VARAKINA,
194116 February 2009
27 March 2003
1,470
12747/09
Aleksandra Aleksandrovna SHCHEKOTIKHINA,
195416 February 2009
14 May 2003 , 16 February 2005,
26 September 2006
and 12 December 2008
1,455
12782/09
Lyubov Anatolyevna YUKHMAN,
196116 February 2009
5 May 2003
1,455
12788/09
Irina Konstantinovna KACHANOVICH,
195816 February 2009
22 April 2003
1,455
12794/09
Yelena Viktorovna KRAVTSOVA,
197716 February 2009
28 April 2004
1,275
12839/09
Irina Vasilyevna OLESHKO,
195316 February 2009
5 May 2003
1,455
30410/09
Vladimir Ivanovich ZADOROZHNYY,
19612 April 2009
31 October 2002
1,560
30420/09
Boris Grigoryevich RESHETNIKOV,
19402 April 2009
28 December 2001
1,695
30462/09
Zinaida Nikiforovna MARCHENKO,
19332 April 2009
23 October 2003
1,365
30740/09
Svetlana Grigoryevna BAZHANOVA,
19422 April 2009
16 February 2001
and 13 February 2003
1,860
30787/09
Liliya Yakovlevna TYULPANOVA,
19412 April 2009
11 March 2003 and 16 March 2004
1,485
30795/09
Vladimir Vasilyevich PETROV,
19462 April 2009
25 October 2002
1,545
30799/09
Valentina Konstantinovna YAKUNINA,
19562 April 2009
28 November 2002
1,530
31669/09
Tatyana Mikhaylovna KHODUS,
19573 April 2009
19 December 1997
and 20 January 2003
2,445
31797/09
Nadezhda Nikolayevna MASHKINA,
19513 April 2009
21 February 2002,
1,665
31936/09
Zoya Vasilyevna SHISTKO,
19483 April 2009
26 December 2002
1,515
31945/09
Nina Ivanovna OLEYNIK,
19483 April 2009
16 December 1997
(labour dispute commission decision)
20 December 2002
2,445
31957/09
Valentina Vladimirovna BODRAYA,
19573 April 2009
30 September 2004
1,200
33223/09
Lyudmila Vladimirovna RASSOLOVA,
19645 June 2009
29 June 2004
1,215
33257/09
Nikolay Ivanovich PRIYMAK,
19465 June 2009
29 December 2001
1,695
33260/09
Gennadiy Aleksandrovich SERDYUK,
19505 June 2009
14 May 2003
and 23 February 2005
1,455
33262/09
Anatoliy Ivanovych TRUKHACHEV,
19415 June 2009
14 August 2002
1,590
33267/09
Georgiy Andreyevich SAFRONOV,
19375 June 2009
5 May 2003
1,455
33395/09
Anna Kirillovna POPOVA,
19395 June 2009
26 January 1998,
(labour dispute commission decision)
30 September 2002
2,415
33410/09
Alla Sergeyevna DIKAYA,
19615 June 2009
23 October 2003
1,365
33423/09
Aleksandr Leonidovich YEREMEYEV,
19575 June 2009
17 July 2003
1,425
33481/09
Nadezhda Dmitriyevna CHUPRINA,
19425 June 2009
26 December 2002
1,515
33482/09
Nadezhda Ivanovna SHARONINA,
19565 June 2009
5 September 2002
1,575
33485/09
Valentina Nikolayevna TIKHONOVA,
19505 June 2009
14 March and 7 November 2003
1,485
33490/09
Vladimir Petrovich GODUNOV,
19485 June 2009
13 Oct ober 2004
1,200
33498/09
Nikolay Aleksandrovich ZHABSKIY,
19435 June 2009
26 December 2002
1,515
33501/09
Aleksandr Ivanovich GORBATENKO,
19555 June 2009
25 June 2004
1,245
33503/09
Yuriy Dmitriyevich DOROSHENKO,
19525 June 2009
26 February 2004
1,290
33506/09
Nelya Antonovna GUZHVA,
19455 June 2009
29 August 2002, 30 September 200 4,
20 October 2004 and 13 July 2006
1,575
33517/09
Yekaterina Fedorovna KULIK,
19485 June 2009
29 July 2003
1,410
33527/09
Valeriy Ivanovich BEVZYUK,
19505 June 2009
25 May 2000
(2 labour dispute commission decisions)
14 April 2003
(2 court decisions)
1,995
65921/09
Natalya Alekseyevna AGARKOVA,
19715 June 2009
25 March 2003
1,470
66999/11
Ivan Yakovlevich KALYUZHIN,
19355 March 2009
6 September 2002
1,575
67007/11
Lyubov Fedorovna KUPYANSKAYA,
19345 March 2009
17 October 2002
1,560
67021/11
Tatyana Anatolyevna SAVCHENKO,
19685 March 2009
26 February 2003
1,485
67034/11
Ninel Aleksandrovna SOKOLOVA,
19585 March 2009
26 February 2003
1,485
67054/11
Lyudmila Petrovna SHEVCHENKO,
194816 February 2009
13 February 2003
1,500
67075/11
Natalya Nikolayevna SHIMANSKAYA,
19645 March 2009
23 October 2003
1,365
67097/11
Galina Petrovna GAVRIKOVA,
195010 April 2009
20 September 2004
1,200
67099/11
Lyudmila Aleksandrovna INDIKOVA,
196310 April 2009
26 August 2003
1,395
67104/11
Mikhail Yuryevich INDIKOV,
196210 April 2009
26 August 2003
1,395
67107/11
Galina Georgiyevna PLOKHIKH,
196410 April 2009
28 November 2002
1,530
67108/11
Yuriy Ivanovich BOLDYREV,
194810 April 2009
17 December 2001
1,710
67142/11
Viktor Vladimirovich TIMOFEYEV,
19555 March 2009
5 May 2003
1,455
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
