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.
AFFAIRE PLATONOV ET AUTRES c. RUSSIE
Doc ref: 5660/18, 7452/18, 10316/18, 10752/18, 11372/18, 11856/18, 17052/18, 18996/18, 26850/18, 30834/18, 34... • ECHR ID: 001-219113
Document date: September 15, 2022
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 2
AFFAIRE PLATONOV ET AUTRES c. RUSSIE
Doc ref: 5660/18, 7452/18, 10316/18, 10752/18, 11372/18, 11856/18, 17052/18, 18996/18, 26850/18, 30834/18, 34... • ECHR ID: 001-219113
Document date: September 15, 2022
Cited paragraphs only
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF PLATONOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 5660/18 and 16 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
15 September 2022
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Platonov and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Darian Pavli , President,
Andreas Zünd ,
Mikhail Lobov , judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 25 August 2022,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicants complained of the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
THE LAW
5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
6. The applicants complained of the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
Article 6 § 1
““In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.”
7. The relevant principles of the Court’s case-law concerning the requirement of impartiality under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention can be found in the leading case of Karelin v. Russia (no. 926/08, §§ 51 ‑ 57, 20 September 2016, with further references). In that case the Court assessed the national rules of administrative procedure and concluded that the statutory requirements allowing for the national judicial authorities to consider an administrative offence case which falls within the ambit of Article 6 of the Convention under its criminal limb, in the absence of a prosecuting authority, was incompatible with the principle of objective impartiality set out in Article 6 of the Convention.
8. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of the complaints in the present case.
9. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
10. 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.”
11. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Kuratov and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 24377/15 and 2 others, 22 October 2019), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
12. The Court further 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,
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State 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 15 September 2022, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Darian Pavli Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Penalty
Date of final domestic decision
Name of court
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros) [1]
5660/18
27/12/2017
Konstantin Borisovich PLATONOV
1976Dimitriyev Dmitriy Sergeyevich
Orenburg
suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 6 months, administrative fine of RUB 30,000
20/09/2017, Orenburzhskiy District Court of the Orenburg Region
1,000
7452/18
18/01/2018
Sergey Stepanovich SMIRNOV
1991Vologin Aleksey Borisovich
Volsk
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 10 months
23/01/2018, Volskiy District Court of the Saratov Region
1,000
10316/18
13/02/2018
Aleksandr Yevgenyevich BORISENKOV
1986Vologin Aleksey Borisovich
Volsk
suspension of the driving licence for 6 months
09/02/2018, Volskiy District Court of the Saratov Region
1,000
10752/18
15/02/2018
Sergey Gennadyevich FROLOV
1981Vologin Aleksey Borisovich
Volsk
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 7 months
13/02/2018, Volskiy District Court of the Saratov Region,
1,000
11372/18
21/02/2018
Yelena Aleksandrovna SIVKOVA
1991Kulakov Yevgeniy Valeryevich
Arkhangelsk
suspension of the driving licence for a year
12/02/2018, Konoshskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk Region
1,000
11856/18
20/02/2018
Andrey Aleksandrovich SVECHNIKOV
1991Kulakov Yevgeniy Valeryevich
Arkhangelsk
in the proceedings leading to the judgment of the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk: administrative fine of RUB 30,000
in the proceedings leading to the judgment of the Lomonosovskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk:
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 7 months
24/04/2018, Oktyabrskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk
30/01/2018, Lomonosovskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk
1,300
17052/18
27/03/2018
Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich PONOMAREV
1992Kulakov Yevgeniy Valeryevich
Arkhangelsk
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 8 months
19/03/2018, Lomonosovskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk
1,000
18996/18
02/04/2018
Vladimir Gennadyevich GLADYSHEV
1971Kulakov Yevgeniy Valeryevich
Arkhangelsk
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 7 months
27/03/2018, Solombalskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk
1,000
26850/18
30/05/2018
Radik Faritovich ARSLANOV
1976Sultanov Marat Azatovich
Udachnyy
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 6 months
26/04/2018, Mirninskiy District Court of the Sakha Republic
1,000
30834/18
08/06/2018
Nikolay Mikhaylovich IGNATYEV
1980Sultanov Marat Azatovich
Udachnyy
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 6 months
05/02/2018, Mirninskiy District Court of the Sakha Republic
1,000
34777/18
09/07/2018
Denis Vladimirovich AVTYUSHCHENKO
1980Vologin Aleksey Borisovich
Volsk
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 7 months
28/06/2018, Volskiy District Court of Saratov Region
1,000
36015/18
12/07/2018
Karen Vachaganovich GARIBYAN
1992Vologin Aleksey Borisovich
Volsk
suspension of the driving licence for 6 months
15/06/2018, Volskiy District Court of the Saratov Region
1,000
37099/18
23/07/2018
Igor Anatolyevich PACHURIN
1981Vologin Aleksey Borisovich
Volsk
administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 7 months
19/06/2018, Volskiy District Court of the Saratov Region
1,000
41498/18
10/08/2018
Aleksey Aleksandrovich OBREZKOV
1980Kulakov Yevgeniy Valeryevich
Arkhangelsk
in the proceedings leading to the judgment of the Kineshma Town Court of the Ivanovo Region:
administrative detention of 5 days
in the proceedings leading to the judgment of the Pinezhskiy District Court of the Arkhangelsk Region: administrative fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 6 months
31/07/2018, Kineshma Town Court of the Ivanovo Region
28/09/2018, Pinezhskiy District Court of the Arkhangelsk Region
1,300
49529/18
10/10/2018
Fedor Aleksandrovich FABIANO
1985Piskunov Dmitriy Igorevich
Moscow
administrative detention of 7 days
16/04/2018, Moscow City Court
1,000
49743/18
13/10/2018
Igor Vladimirovich PEPELYAYEV
1980Kovalskiy Aleksandr Sergeyevich
Kurgan
suspension of the driving licence for a year
02/07/2018, Kurgan Town Court of the Kurgan Region
1,000
52596/18
30/10/2018
Vyacheslav Nikolayevich INDEYEV
1977Vologin Aleksey Borisovich
Volsk
suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 8 months, administrative fine of RUB 30,000
29/10/2018, Volskiy District Court of the Saratov Region
1,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
