CASE OF SHTABOVENKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
Doc ref: 22722/07, 1197/10, 1330/11, 13890/09, 1397/11, 1437/11, 19486/10, 2016/11, 24423/10, 25755/10, 27326... • ECHR ID: 001-118732
Document date: April 25, 2013
- Inbound citations: 9
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 3
- •
- Outbound citations: 2
FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF SHTABOVENKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
(Application no. 22722/07 and 99 other applications )
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
25 April 2013
This judgment is final . It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Shtabovenko and Others v. Ukraine ,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Boštjan M. Zupančič , President, Ann Power-Forde , Helena Jäderblom , judges, and Stephen Phillips , Deputy Section Registrar ,
Having deliberated in private on 2 April 2013 ,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1 . The case originated in 100 applications against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by Ukrainian nationals , a company based in Ukraine and a Russian national , whose details are specified in the appended tables (“the applicants”).
2 . The applicant Mr Viktor Andriyovych Bondar died ( application no . 13890/09) . His wife, Ms Nadiya Yefremivna Bondar , manifested a wish to pursue the application on his behalf .
3 . By letter dated 19 December 2012, the Government informed the Court that the applicant Mr Vladimir Shabodinovich Khamzatov ( application no. 33262/10 ) had died. A copy of the letter was forwarded to the deceased applicant ’ s address on 19 February 2013 by registered post for comments to be submitted by 11 March 2013. The reader was warned that i n the absence of response, the Court would assume that the applicant ha d died and that no individual was entitled and wished to pursue the application . No reply was received.
4 . By letter dated 27 October 2012 the applicant Ms Olena Georgiyivna Mykhaylova ( application no. 475/11 ) informed the Court that she wanted to w ithdraw the application since the judgment rendered in her favour had been fully enforced.
5 . The Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mr Nazar Kulchytskyy .
6 . On 4 October 2012 the applications above were communicated to the Government of Ukraine .
7 . The Russian Government, having been informed of their right to intervene in the proceedings in respect of the applicant in application no. 63882/09 (Article 36 § 1 of the Convention and Rule 44 of the Rules of Court), indicated that they did not wish to exercise that right.
THE FACTS
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
8 . On the dates set out in the appended tables domestic courts and labour disputes commissions delivered decisions according to which the applicants were entitled to various pecuniary amounts or to have certain actions taken in their favour. The decisions became final and enforceable. However, the applicants were unable to obtain the enforcement of the decisions in due time.
9 . Some of the applicants also made submissions concerning factual and legal matters unrelated to the above non-enforcement issues.
THE LAW
I. THE STANDING OF THE APPLICANT IN APPLICATION N o . 13890/09
10 . The Court considers that the applicant ’ s wife in application no. 13890/09 (see paragraph 2 above) has standing to continue the proceedings in the applicant ’ s stead (see, among other authorities , Mironov v. Ukraine , no. 19916/04, § 12, 14 December 2006 ).
I I . ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 6 AND 13 OF THE CONVENTION AND OF ARTICLE 1 OF PR O TOCOL No. 1
11 . The applicants complained about the lengthy non-enforcement of the decisions given in their favour and about the lack of effective domestic remedies in respect of those complaints. They relied on, expr essly or in substance, Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 .
A. Applications tabulated in Appendices 1 and 2
12 . The Court considers that the applications tabulated in Appendices 1 and 2 should be joined, given their common factual and legal background.
1. Applications tabulated in Appendix 1
13 . In their observations t he Government submitted that the debtor in respect of the judgments indicated in Appendix 1 was a private company. However, between 28 November 2005 and 30 July 2010 the Fuel and Energy (Complex Enterprises) R egister included the debtor in the procedure for recovery of debts pursuant to the 2005 Act on measures designed to ensure the stable functioning of fuel and energy enterprises and all enforcement proceedings in respect of it were frozen. Therefore, the Government bore responsibility for the debtor ’ s actions from the moment when the applicants ’ judgments became final and until it was excluded from the Register. They argued that those periods could not be considered excessive. As regards the period after 30 July 2010, the Government, referring to the Court ’ s case law (see Dovgal v. Ukraine ( dec. ), no. 50726/06, 20 October 2009), maintained that the State was responsible for the non-enforcement in the applicant ’ s favour only insofar as the State Bailiffs ’ Service was involved , while the applicants had not challenged before the domestic courts the Bailiffs ’ alleged inactivity in the enforcement of their judgments. Given the above the Government claimed that the applications should be declared inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded.
14 . G iven its findings in previous similar cases against Ukraine (see, for instance , Andreyenko and Others v. Ukraine ( dec. ), no. 22312/03, 19 June 2007 and Gapeyev v. Ukraine ( dec. ), no. 21659/06, 17 November 2009) , the Court considers that these applications must be declared inadmissible pursuant to Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention .
2. Applications tabulated in Appendix 2
15 . The Government submitted in their observations that the debtor in respect of the judgments specified in Appendix 2 was a private legal entity. They reiterated that the State ’ s positive obligation to enforce the judgments against a private entity extends no further than the involvement of State bodies in the enforcement proceedings. They claimed that the applicants ’ complaints are manifestly ill-founded given that they failed to challenge the actions of the State Bailiffs ’ Service.
Loading citations...16 . The Court observes that the parties ’ submissions did not disclose that there were any factors, attributable to the State, which impeded or blocked the enforcement of the judgments at issue for an excessively long period of time. In any event it appeared after the communication of the applications to the respondent Government that on 5 July 2007, that is more than six months before the applications were lodged with this Court, the debtor had been finally liquidated without legal successor due to bankruptcy and excluded from the State companies register. These applications must, therefore , be declared inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded pursuant to Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention .
B. Applications tabulated in Appendix 3
17 . In view of the similarity of the applications in terms of the principal legal issue raised, the Court finds it appropriate to join them.
18 . The Court notes that the applicant in application no. 33262/10, Mr Vladimir Shabodinovich Khamzatov , has died and that no heir has requested permission to pursue the application.
19 . It also notes that the applicant in application no. 475/11, Ms Olena Georgiyivna Mykhaylova , informed the Court that she did not intend to pursue the application since the judgment, rendered in her favour had been fully enforced.
20 . In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application s . In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the applications out of the list.
C. Applications tabulated in Appendices 4 and 5
21 . In view of the similarity of the applications in terms of the principal legal issue raised, the Court finds it appropriate to join them.
22 . The Cou rt notes that the above complaints of the applicants tabulated in Appendices 4 and 5 (see paragraph 11 above) are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention. It further notes that they are not inadmissible on any other grounds. They must therefore be declared admissible.
23 . The Court finds that the decisions in the applicants ’ favour were not enforced in due time, for which the State authorities were responsible.
24 . Having regard to its well-established case-law on the subject (see Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov , cited above, §§ 56-58 and 66-70 ), the Court finds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the prolonged non-enforcement of the decisions in the applicants ’ favour. It also considers that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention in that the applicants did not have an effective domestic remedy to redress the damage created by such non-enforcement.
III . OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION
25 . Some of the applicants raised other complaints under the Convention which the Court has carefully examined. 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.
26 . It follows that those complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
I V. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
27 . Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
28 . In the present case, bearing in mind its previous decision on the matter (see Kharuk and Others v. Ukraine [Committee], no. 703/05 and 115 other applications, § 25, 26 July 2012) , the Court considers it reasonable and equitable to award 3,000 euros (EUR) to each applicant in the applications which concern non ‑ enforcement delays exceeding three years (the appl ications tabulated in Appendix 4 ) and EUR 1,500 to each applicant in the other applications (the appl ications tabulated in Appendix 5 ). These sums are to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, as well as costs and expenses.
29 . The Court further notes that the respondent State has an outstanding obligation to enforce the judgments which remain enforceable.
30 . The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY
1. Decides to join the applications tabulated in Appendices 1 and 2 ;
2. Declares inadmissible the applications indicated in Appendices 1 and 2 ;
3. Decides to join the applications tabulated in Appendix 3 ;
4. Decides to strike the applications enumerated in Appendix 3 out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention;
5. Decides to join the applications tabulated in Appendices 4 and 5 ;
6. Declares the complaints of the applicants listed in Appendices 4 and 5, under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the lengthy non-enforcement of the decisions given in their favour and about the lack of effective domestic remedies in respect of those complaints , admissible and the remainder of the applications inadmissible;
7. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1;
8. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;
9. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to enforce the domestic decisions in the applicants ’ favour which remain enforceable, a nd is to pay, within three months, EUR 3,000 (three thousand euros) to each applicant or his or her estate in the applications tabulated in Appendix 4 and EUR 1,500 (one thousand five hundred euros) to each applicant or his or her estate in the applications tabulated in Appendix 5 in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants on the above amounts which are to be converted into the national currency at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 25 April 2013 , pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Stephen Phillips Boštjan M. Zupančič Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX 1
( inadmissible applications )
No.
Application no. and date of introduction
Applicants ’ name and date of birth
Relevant domestic decision
63284/09
17/11/2009
Nadiya Kostyantynivna KRAVCHENYUK
11/08/1959
Oleksandriya Court, 05/05/2009
63328/09
17/11/2009
Tetyana Yuriyivna PASICHNA
19/04/1960
Oleksandriya Court, 05/05/2009
APPENDIX 2
( inadmissible applications )
No.
Application no. and date of introduction
Applicants ’ name and date of birth
Relevant domestic decision
6147/11
14/01/2011
Olga Illivna YAKOVENKO
19/08/1951
Krukivskyy District Court of Kremenchuk, 04/03/2005
6164/11
14/01/2011
Stanislav Viktorovych TSARENKO
01/01/1971
Krukivskyy District Court of Kremenchuk, 20/12/2004
6214/11
14/01/2010
Volodymyr Panteliyovych PALIYENKO
19/07/1944
Krukivskyy District Court of Kremenchuk, 24/05/2004
APPENDIX 3
( applications struck out of the Court ’ s list of cases )
No.
Application no. and date of introduction
Applicants ’ name and date of birth
Relevant domestic decision
33262/10
25/05/2010
Vladimir Shabodinovich KHAMZATOV
01/01/1948
1) Torez Court , 16/04/2008
2) Torez Court , 16/07/2008
3) Torez Court , 18/07/2008
475/11
13/12/2010
Olena Georgiyivna MYKHAYLOVA
01/01/1964
Zhovtnevyy District Court of Kharkiv, 07/04/2010
APPENDIX 4
(non-enforcement delays three years and more )
No.
Application no. and date of introduction
Applicants ’ name and date of birth
Relevant domestic decisions
22722/07
05/05/2007
Vasyl Petrovych SHTABOVENKO
27/12/1952
Tsentralnyy District Court of Mykolayiv , 18/04/2002
13890/09
18/02/2009
Viktor Andriyovych BONDAR
09/03/1939
Tetiyiv Court, 26/11/2007
57014/09
19/10/2009
Valeriy Volodymyrovych SACHEK
02/04/1966
Ovruch Court, 03/04/2002
59484/09
02/11/2009
Mariya Yosypivna TABACHUK
04/07/1949
Popilnyanskyy District Court of the Zhytomyr Region, 30/10/2006, as amended by the Zhytomyr Regional Court of Appeal, 17/01/2008
59562/09
28/10/2009
Oksana Vladimirovna SECHKAREVA
18/10/1982
Krasnyy Luch Court, 11/10/2006
59650/09
22/10/2009
Oleksandr Volodymyrovych BURYAK
27/06/1955
1) Oleksandriya Court, 29/01/2008, as amended by the Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 05/11/2008
2) Oleksandriya Court, 15/04/2008, as amended by the Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 04/12/2008
59976/09
09/11/2009
Mykola Viktorovych TOCHENYY
13/05/1963
Obolonskyy District Court of Kyiv, 16/09/2003, quashed by the Higher Administrative Court on 02/11/2010
60221/09
26/10/2009
Anatoliy Ivanovych GUMONITSKYY
01/01/1950
Tetiyiv Court, 31/01/2008
60971/09
05/11/2009
Mykola Stepanovych VASYLYK
21/01/1967
Kolomyya Court, 09/12/2004
61111/09
04/11/2009
Viktor Sergiyovych YALPUTA
19/09/1954
Oleksandriya Court, 15/05/2008
61123/09
01/11/2009
Anatoliy Ivanovich YELISEYEV
06/01/1947
1) Novogrodivka Court , 31/07/2002
2) Decision of a Labour Disputes Commission of the Novogrodivska Mine, lodged with the State Bailiffs ’ Service on 16 April 2004.
61576/09
16/11/2009
Andriy Mykolayovych BARDAS
07/09/1968
Military Court of the Cherkassy Garrison, 31/08/2005
61892/09
11/11/2009
Mykola Tykhonovych GORBACHUK
25/01/1949
Solomyanskyy District Court of Kyiv, 16/01/2006
62027/09
11/11/2009
Svitlana Mykolayivna BYSHA
06/01/1946
Oleksandriya Court, 11/02/2008
62319/09
12/11/2009
Olena Fedorivna DAVYSKYBA
25/08/1932
Trostyanets Court, 15/05/2007
62469/09
19/11/2009
Anatoliy Andriyovych MAKSYMENKO
29/09/1959
Lubny Court, 19/06/2007
63000/09
27/10/2009
Svetlana Nikiforovna CHERNOVA
15/04/1964
Labour Disputes Commission of the Ukrayinskyy Naukovo-Doslidnyy Instytut Skla , State Enterprise , 05/02/2007
63028/09
27/10/2009
Larisa Ivanovna KLIPENKO
21/06/1951
Labour Disputes Commission of the Ukrayinskyy Naukovo-Doslidnyy Instytut Skla , State Enterprise , 05/02/2007
63090/09
27/10/2009
Mariya Vasilyevna BUT
12/02/1947
Labour Disputes Commission of the Ukrayinskyy Naukovo-Doslidniy Instytut Skla , State Enterprise , 27/02/2007
63100/09
27/10/2009
Nina Vasilyevna LITVINOVA
25/06/1950
Kostyantynivka Court, 15/10/2004
63106/09
27/10/2009
Lyudmila Alekseyevna KOROLEVA
16/01/1942
Kostyantynivka Court, 29/03/2001
63114/09
27/10/2009
Lidiya Ivanovna TISHCHENKO
06/10/1941
Kostyantynivka Court, 25/08/2005
63123/09
27/10/2009
Vladimir Vladimirovich PASECHNIK
13/11/1970
Kostyantynivka Court, 22/12/1997
63132/09
27/10/2009
Igor Viktorovich MIROSHNICHENKO
02/04/1971
Kostyantynivka Court, 14/03/2003
63150/09
27/10/2009
Eduard Mikhaylovich SOLOVYEV
27/06/1969
1) Kostyantynivka Court , 22/12/1997
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 27/01/2003
63157/09
27/10/2009
Lyudmila Andreyevna GORCHAKOVA
22/11/1937
Kostyantynivka Court, 02/04/2001
63163/09
27/10/2009
Yekaterina Vasilyevna NESTERENKO
21/10/1956
1) Kostyantynivka Court , 02/08/2002
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 18/04/2003
63180/09
27/10/2009
Yevgeniy Nikolayevich GUZHVA
02/01/1968
1) Kostyantynivka Court , 30/09/2004
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 20/10/2004
3) Labour Disputes Commission of the Avtosklo , State Enterprise , 14/07/2006
63198/09
27/10/2009
Lyudmila Alekseyevna SEMCHISHYNA
07/08/1927
Kostyantynivka Court, 02/04/2001
63206/09
27/10/2009
Yekaterina Viktorovna IVASHCHENKO
19/03/1952
Labour Disputes Commission of the Ukrayinskyy Naukovo-Doslidnyy Instytut Skla , State Enterprise , 05/02/2007
63212/09
27/10/2009
Zhanetta Petrovna SHUBINA
08/11/1932
Labour Disputes Commission of the Avtosklo , State Enterprise , 12/03/2001
63213/09
27/10/2009
Natalya Vladimirovna MADYUDYA
15/10/1971
1) Labour Disputes Commission of the Avtosklo , State Enterprise , 27/12/2000
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 08/05/2009
63217/09
27/10/2009
Vadim Aleksandrovich STAROSTENKO
29/05/1962
Kostyantynivka Court, 29 /12/ 2001
63224/09
27/10/2009
Nina Stepanovna GEBUZA
09/10/1937
1) Kostyantynivka Court , 08/11/2002
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 08/11/2002
63226/09
27/10/2009
Valentina Ivanovna KUSHCHENKOVA
07/04/1957
1) Labour Disputes Commission of the Avtosklo , State Enterprise , 11/12/1997
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 19/03/2001
63230/09
27/10/2009
Nina Alekseyevna VOLKOVA
23/11/1957
Kostyantynivka Court, 25/01/2002
63235/09
27/10/2009
Tatyana Gennadyevna SAKHNO
31/01/1956
Labour Disputes Commission of the Ukrayinskyy Naukovo-Doslidnyy Instytut Skla , State Enterprise , 05/11/2007
63365/09
27/10/2009
Valentin Borisovich GOLOVCHENKO
07/07/1948
1) Kostyantynivka Court , 08/04/2002
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 23/01/2009
63369/09
18/11/2009
Applicant 2:
Ivan Petrovich KOROLKOV
01/01/1940
1) Pecherskyy District Court of Kyiv, 16/02/2007
2) Pecherskyy District Court of Kyiv, 20/03/2007
63374/09
27/10/2009
Lidiya Prokofyevna ORLOVA
05/04/1939
Kostyantynivka Court, 17/09/2004
63379/09
27/10/2009
Mikhail Mikhaylovich NEDOPEKIN
08/10/1950
Labour Disputes Commission of the Avtosklo , State Enterprise , 12/04/2003
63385/09
27/10/2009
Stanislav Stepanovich GURKOVSKIY
11/09/1959
Kostyantynivka Court, 26/01/2009
63393/09
27/10/2009
Irina Ivanovna SHTOFEL
10/02/1955
Kostyantynivka Court, 03/03/2005
63399/09
27/10/2009
Aleksandr Mikhaylovich SHTOFEL
22/10/1949
1) Kostyantynivka Court , 03/04/2003
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 13/06/2006
63401/09
27/10/2009
Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich KOVAL
17/12/1950
Kostyantynivka Court, 23/09/2002
63408/09
27/10/2009
Vladimir Ivanovich KIYAN
02/04/1954
Kostyantynivka Court, 13/11/2001
63413/09
27/10/2009
Nikolay Vasilyevich DUDNIK
20/01/1937
1) Labour Disputes Commission of the Tekhbudsklo , State Enterprise , 25/09/2002
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 03/03/2009
63418/09
27/10/2009
Valentina Ivanovna LISTRATENKO
01/10/1946
Kostyantynivka Court, 15/11/2001
63425/09
27/10/2009
Galina Vladimirovna DUNAYTSEVA
28/02/1949
Kostyantynivka Court, 23/10/2002
63435/09
27/10/2009
Alla Nikolayevna BOZHKO
18/03/1964
Kostyantynivka Court, 05/09/2002
63479/09
27/10/2009
Olga Yefimovna GLADILINA
01/12/1947
1) Kostyantynivka Court , 14/05/2003
2) Kostyantynivka Court , 28/04/2004
63569/09
17/11/2009
Sergiy Stepanovych NAKONECHNYY
01/01/1959
Tetiyiv Court, 04/12/2007
63866/09
27/10/2009
Valentina Demyanovna KUZOVENINA
30/12/1948
Krasnyy Luch Court, 03/10/2007
63882/09
23/11/2009
Anastasiya Semenovna DIKAREVA
31/10/1934
Sieverodonetsk Court, 18/07/2008
64434/09
26/11/2009
Lyubov Yakivna LYAKHOVA
24/04/1948
1) Bakhchisaray Court , 11/02/2004
2) Bakhchisaray Court , 19/04/2007
65379/09
30/11/2009
Sergey Aleksandrovich MIKHAYLOV
02/10/1966
Krasnyy Luch Court, 06/10/2008
65682/09
24/11/2009
Andrey Vladimirovich LOBANOV
11/11/1976
Novogrodivka Court, 02/11/2005
67048/09
10/12/2009
Pavlo Vasylyovych KOZIYCHUK
04/01/1931
Bershad Court, 28/05/2009
1197/10
22/12/2009
Nina Dmytrivna VALENTYUK
13/09/1955
Mariya Opanasivna VALENTYUK
20/11/1929
Dmytro Anatoliyovych VALENTYUK
01/01/1984
Valentyna Anatoliyivna KLIMCHUK
30/07/1976
Khmelnytskyy Court, 07/04/2005, as amended by the Khmelnytskyy Regional Court of Appeal on 21/10/2005
19486/10
18/03/2010
Anatoliy Vyacheslavovich VLADIMIRSKIY
12/09/1957
1) Bryanka Court , 18/04/2006
2) Bryanka Court , 17/06/2008
24423/10
19/04/2010
Olena Vasylivna MORDOVINA
28/07/1959
1) Labour Disputes Commission of the Pervomayskyy State Enterprise « Khimprom », 10/12/2007
2) Labour Disputes Commission of the Pervomayskyy State Enterprise « Khimprom », 18/02/2008
3) Pervomayskyy Court , 26/06/2008
25755/10
23/04/2010
Igor Oleksandrovych BALESNYY
16/11/1975
Krasnyy Lyman Court, 12/12/2003
37249/10
21/06/2010
Mykola Grygorovych PETNYAK
20/02/1966
Galytskyy District Court of Lviv, 22/07/2009
46988/10
23/07/2010
Sergey Ivanovich MAYMURENKO
02/05/1947
1) Kramatorsk Court , 21/01/2009
2) Kramatorsk Court , 21/01/2009
48871/10
30/07/2010
Yaroslava Petrivna VIVCHAR
10/04/1955
Lychakivskyy District Court of Lviv, 23/06/2009
63837/10
18/10/2010
Anatoliy Grygorovych VORONKO
24/01/1939
Dniprovskyy District Court of Kyiv, 16/05/2007
67118/10
08/11/2010
Vasyl Dmytrovych NYZOVETS
01/09/1923
1) Shepetivka Court, 18/12/2007, as amended by the Lviv Administrative Court of Appeal on 30/09/2008
2) Shepetivka Court , 26/02/2009
70818/10
17/11/2010
Viktor Pavlovych OBLOG
08/11/1955
Shostka
Shostka Court, 26/12/2008
70849/10
22/11/2010
MZHK MRIYA, TOV
Lugansk Regional Commercial Court, 02/04/2007
71165/10
20/11/2010
Anatoliy Petrovych SANEVYCH
04/11/1962
Zhytomyr Regional Administrative Court, 27/09/2007
72636/10
29/11/2010
Valentina Viktorovna PROKOPENKO
19/05/1962
Pervomayskyy Court, 22/08/2008
73013/10
29/11/2010
Valentina Nikolayevna SOKOLOVA
01/01/1965
Pervomayskyy Court, 10/07/2008
73067/10
01/12/2010
Olga Petrivna KALASHNYUK
01/01/1939
Tetiyiv Court, 29/11/2007
73241/10
30/11/2010
Tatyana Ivanovna POKHODZHAY
23/08/1953
1) Labour Disputes Commission of the Pervomayskyy State Enterprise “ Khimprom ”, 10/12/2007
2) Pervomayskyy Court , 25/07/2008
73818/10
20/11/2010
Iryna Ivanivna GULCHAK
01/01/1954
Staromiskyy District Court of Vinnytsya, 29/07/2002
73882/10
26/10/2010
Sergey Nikolayevich PUGACH
17/02/1967
Novogrodivka Court, 06/11/1996
74828/10
29/11/2010
Galina Vasilyevna MAKSIMOVICH
01/01/1952
Pervomayskyy Court, 09/07/2008
1330/11
22/12/2010
Viktor Ivanovych KOLOSOV
01/01/1946
1) Lysychansk Court , 03/02/2005
2) Lysychansk Court , 05/04/2005
1397/11
21/12/2010
Anatoliy Dmytrovych KOLYADA
15/11/1957
Kyiv Administrative Court of Appeal, 08/10/2009
1437/11
20/12/2010
Anatoliy Kirillovich YOVZHENKO
28/03/1949
1) Selydove Court , 18/02/2009
2) Selydove Court , 20/02/2009
2016/11
27/12/2010
Vladimir Ivanovich MALYUK
08/08/1955
Lysychansk Court, 25/11/2008
3203/11
17/11/2010
Viktor Pavlovych OBLOG
08/11/1955
Shostka Court, 30/06/2009
4481/11
28/12/2010
Vladimir Ivanovich MALYUK
08/08/1955
Lysychansk Court, 04/09/2008
5406/11
12/01/2011
Mykola Yuriyovych PRYSHCHEPA
01/01/1948
Tetiyiv Court, 26/11/2007
5779/11
13/11/2011
Nikolay Pavlovich ZAKHAROV
01/05/1949
Lugansk Regional Commercial Court, 20/05/2003
5836/11
15/01/2011
Volodymyr Vasylyovych ZAMRYKOTA
04/09/1960
Fastiv Court, 05/03/2008
5844/11
12/01/2011
Tamara Volodymyrivna ILYASHEVA
25/04/1951
Lysychansk Court, 02/02/2005
5965/11
13/01/2011
Svitlana Fedorivna SHEMYAKINA
09/10/1944
Lysychansk Court, 20/01/2005
APPENDIX 5
(non-enforcement delays less tha n three years )
No.
Application no. and date of introduction
Applicant name
date of birth
Relevant domestic decisions
63369/09
18/11/2009
Applicant 1:
Vladislav Valentinovich VOROBYEV
20/11/1940
1) Pecherskyy District Court of Kyiv, 16/02/2007
2) Pecherskyy District Court of Kyiv, 20/03/2007
27326/10
13/04/2010
Nikolay Vasilyevich PETUSHKOV 13/12/1956
Fedor Viktorovich MAKAROV
26/09/1954
Donetsk Regional Court of Appeal, 16/10/2009
56006/10
14/09/2010
Oleksandr Grygorovych MASHCHENKO
20/08/1981
Sevastopol Administrative Court of Appeal, 19/05/2010
477/11
13/12/2010
Tetyana Pavlivna DOLGOVA
01/01/1952
Zhovtnevyy District Court of Kharkiv, 12/04/2010
480/11
13/12/2010
Olena Anatoliyivna OLIYNYK
01/01/1953
Zhovtnevyy District Court of Kharkiv, 05/10/2009
5747/11
15/01/2011
Sergey Georgiyevich CHURSIN
01/01/1956
Tsentralno-Miskyy Court of Makiyivka, 28/04/2010