THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 5863/20 Dmitriy Nikolayevich KOVALCHUK against Russia

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 30 November 2021 as a Committee composed of:

Georgios A. Serghides, President, Anja Seibert-Fohr, Frédéric Krenc, judges,

and Olga Chernishova, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 21 January 2020,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

1. The applicant, Mr Dmitriy Nikolayevich Kovalchuk, is a Russian national, who was born in 1983 and lives in St Petersburg.

2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented initially by Mr M. Galperin, Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights, and then by his successor in that office, Mr M. Vinogradov.

3. The applicant was married to Ms E.K., with whom he has two children born in 2010. After the couple’s divorce in 2013, the children have been living alternately with both parents. In 2017 the applicant applied to the court seeking the children’s residence to be determined as being with him. E.K. counterclaimed. Pending the proceedings the children remained with the applicant. Despite the fact that expert psychologists and the childcare authorities considered that it would be in the children’s best interests to live with the applicant, on 29 August 2018 the Vyborgskiy District Court of St Petersburg (“the District Court”) took a decision in favour of the children’s mother having found “no exceptional circumstances justifying [the children]’s separation from [her]”. On 24 January 2019 the judgment was upheld on appeal, and on 31 July 2019 the applicant’s cassation appeal was rejected.

4. In September 2019 the children began living with the applicant on a weekly basis from Thursday to Monday, and since April 2020 – exclusively with the applicant.

5. In September 2020 the applicant again applied to the District Court for a residence order in respect of the children. E.K. did not object. On 4 February 2021 the District Court granted the applicant’s claim.

6. The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention and Article 14 of the Convention, in conjunction with Article 8, about the judgment of the District Court of 29 August 2018 granting the residence order in respect of the children to their mother and alleged discrimination on grounds of sex.

THE LAW

7. The Court notes that shortly after the impugned judgment the children started living with the applicant on a half-week basis and subsequently – on a permanent basis, and that by the judgment of 4 February 2021 the applicant obtained a judgment in his favour granting him a residence order in respect of the children. The material facts giving rise to the present application have therefore ceased to exist and the applicant has been able to enjoy his family life with his children.

8. 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 (b) of the Convention, considers that the matter has been resolved (see Association SOS Attentats and de Boery v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 76642/01, § 32, ECHR 2006‑XIV). It is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application.

9. Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Done in English and notified in writing on 13 January 2022.

Olga Chernishova Georgios A. Serghides Deputy Registrar President