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

PONKRATOV v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 26545/20 • ECHR ID: 001-218804

Document date: June 30, 2022

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 3

PONKRATOV v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 26545/20 • ECHR ID: 001-218804

Document date: June 30, 2022

Cited paragraphs only

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 26545/20 Viktor Nikolayevich PONKRATOV against Russia

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 30 June 2022 as a Committee composed of:

Darian Pavli, President, Andreas Zünd, Mikhail Lobov, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 April 2020,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table.

The applicant’s complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning his absence from civil proceedings was communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”).

THE LAW

The Court observes that the applicant took part in the first instance hearings via a video link, and that there was no allegation of malfunctioning or any other restriction on his ability to follow the proceedings. In this respect, the Court reiterates that the use of videoconferencing equipment is compatible with the notion of a fair and public hearing, provided that the detainee is able to follow the proceedings, to see the persons present and hear what is being said, but also to be seen and heard by the other parties, the judge and witnesses, without technical impediment (see Sakhnovskiy v. Russia [GC], no. 21272/03, § 98, 2 November 2010, and Yevdokimov and Others v. Russia , nos. 27236/05 and 10 others, §§ 42-43, 16 February 2016, with further references).

The Court further notes that the applicant did not ask to participate in appeal and cassation hearings, either in person or via a video link. Finally, he did not explain what new arguments or evidences he could have personally presented or produced to the appeal and/or cassation courts.

Taking into account the above factors, the Court considers that the application is manifestly ill-founded (see also for a recent example, Amirkhanyan v. Russia (dec.) [Committee], no. 25439/14, 9 January 2018, and Semilutskiy and Others v. Russia (dec.) [Committee], no. 53079/16 and 3 others, 30 April 2020), and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Declares the application inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 28 July 2022.

Viktoriya Maradudina Darian Pavli Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention

(applicant’s absence from civil proceedings)

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Nature of the dispute

Final decision

First-instance hearing date

Court

Appeal hearing date

Court

Final decision date

Court

26545/20

30/04/2020

Viktor Nikolayevich PONKRATOV

1984Compensation for inadequate conditions of detention in 2006

26/02/2019

Leninskiy District Court of Tambov

05/06/2019

Tambov Regional Court

10/02/2020

Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846