Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

DOROSH v. UKRAINE

Doc ref: 27112/21 • ECHR ID: 001-220768

Document date: October 6, 2022

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

DOROSH v. UKRAINE

Doc ref: 27112/21 • ECHR ID: 001-220768

Document date: October 6, 2022

Cited paragraphs only

FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 27112/21 Stepan Igorovych DOROSH

against Ukraine

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 6 October 2022 as a Committee composed of:

Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström , President,

Ivana Jelić ,

Kateřina Šimáčková , judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 May 2021,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table. He was represented by Mr M.V. Bem , a lawyer practising in Kyiv.

The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of criminal proceedings and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law were communicated to the Ukrainian Government (“the Government”).

THE LAW

In the present application, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the duration of the proceedings in the present case.

In particular, the Court notes that in view of the complexity of the case and considering the conduct of the defendants and authorities, the length of the proceedings in the present case cannot be considered excessive.

In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

The applicant also complained under Article 13 of the Convention.

The Court has declared the applicant’s complaints under Article 6 inadmissible. Accordingly, the applicant did not have an “arguable claim” of a violation of a substantive Convention provision and, therefore, Article 13 of the Convention is inapplicable to this part of the application.

It follows that the complaint under Article 13 must also be rejected pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Declares the application inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 27 October 2022.

Viktoriya Maradudina Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention

(excessive length of criminal proceedings)

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Start of proceedings

End of proceedings

Total length

Levels of jurisdiction

27112/21

18/05/2021

Stepan Igorovych DOROSH

1992

07/05/2018

pending

More than 4 years and 3 months and 16 days

2 levels of jurisdiction

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 398107 • Paragraphs parsed: 43931842 • Citations processed 3409255