CASE OF KORMACHEVA AND 105 OTHER CASES AGAINST RUSSIA
Doc ref: 53084/99, 28222/06, 33820/04, 30395/04, 55520/00, 22892/03, 22721/04, 4171/03, 42277/04, 38321/03, 1... • ECHR ID: 001-175115
Document date: June 7, 2017
- Inbound citations: 743
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 27
- •
- Outbound citations: 2
Resolution CM/ ResDH (2017)168 Execution of the judgment s of the European Court of Human Rights 10 6 c ase s against the Russian Federation concerning length of domestic judicial proceedings and remedies thereof
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 7 June 2017 at the 12 8 8 t h meeting of the Ministers ’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),
Having regard to the final judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee in these cases and to the violations established;
Recalling the respondent State ’ s obligation, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:
- of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
Having noted that the just satisfaction, where awarded, has been paid by the government of the respondent State;
Noting with satisfaction the measures adopted by the Russian authorities to resolve the problem of excessive length of civil and criminal proceedings and the lack of an effective domestic remedy in this respect (see Appendix 2);
Recalling that the Court recognised the effectiveness of the remedy established in the Russian Federation for obtaining compensation in respect of excessively lengthy judicial proceedings;
Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted,
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and
DECIDES to close the examination thereof.
Appendix 1: List of cases
Civil proceedings
Application
Case
Judgment of
Final on
53084/99
KORMACHEVA
29/01/2004
Loading citations...14/06/2004
28222/06
ABORINA
11/04/2013
11/04/2013
33820/04
ANGELOVA
13/12/2007
13/03/2008
30395/04
AVAKOVA
22/06/2006
22/09/2006
55520/00
BABURIN
24/03/2005
24/06/2005
22892/03
BAKIYEVETS
15/06/2006
15/09/2006
22721/04
BARANTSEVA
04/03/2010
04/06/2010
4171/03
CHEVKIN
15/06/2006
15/09/2006
42277/04
DOVIDYAN
15/10/2009
15/01/2010
38321/03
DZHIGARKHANOV
21/10/2010
21/10/2010
11549/02
FALIMONOV
25/03/2008
29/09/2008
23310/04
GASANOVA
30/04/2009
30/07/2009
10929/03
GLAZKOV
12/10/2006
12/01/2007
20882/04
GOROVAYA
22/12/2009
22/03/2010
34171/04
GUBER
23/10/2008
23/01/2009
10994/05
KARTASHEV
13/01/2011
13/01/2011
24427/02
KAYANKIN
11/02/2010
11/05/2010
39898/03
KHARITONOV
16/07/2009
16/10/2009
5507/06
KIRILL MARCHENKO
09/10/2008
09/01/2009
76964/01
KIRSANOVA
22/06/2006
22/09/2006
76835/01
KOLOMIYETS
22/02/2007
22/05/2007
25224/04
KOZYAK
13/01/2011
13/01/2011
44374/04
KUDINOVA
02/11/2006
02/02/2007
24827/06
KUPRINY
25/02/2010
25/05/2010
44436/06
KURBATOV
02/10/2008
02/01/2009
12049/02
KUTSENKO
1/06/2006
1/09/2006
22118/02
KUZIN
09/06/2005
09/09/2005
43372/06
LEKHANOVA
22/12/2009
22/03/2010
20441/02
LELIK
03/06/2010
03/09/2010
63527/00
LEVSHINY
09/11/2004
30/03/2005
29510/04
MARCHENKO
05/10/2006
05/01/2007
13119/03
MARKOVA
08/01/2009
08/04/2009
28602/02
MARUSEVA
29/05/2008
29/08/2008
30019/05
MIKHAYLOVICH
12/02/2009
05/06/2009
16141/05
MP KINESKOP
22/12/2009
22/03/2010
9619/05
NOZHKOV
19/02/2013
19/02/2013
77089/01
OLSHANNIKOVA
29/06/2006
29/09/2006
21088/06
ORLOVA
09/10/2008
09/01/2009
39814/04
PALACHEVA
19/06/2014
19/06/2014
11496/05
PANCHENKO
11/06/2015
11/06/2015
14949/02
PLAKSIN
29/04/2004
10/11/2004
27865/06
PLEMYANOVA
15/10/2009
15/01/2010
31948/05
POSPEKH
02/05/2013
02/05/2013
28954/02
RASH
13/01/2005
13/04/2005
18072/04
REDNIKOV
06/12/2011
06/12/2011
9941/03
ROLGEZER AND OTHERS
29/04/2008
29/07/2008
19457/02
ROMANENKO AND ROMANENKO
19/10/2006
19/01/2007
22554/04
RUBTSOVA
13/01/2011
13/01/2011
21774/06
RYAZANTSEV
10/03/2011
10/03/2011
14983/04
RYBAKOV
22/12/2005
22/03/2006
16004/04
RYPAKOVA
08/01/2009
08/04/2009
924/03
RYSEV
18/06/2009
18/09/2009
38015/03
SALAMATINA
01/03/2007
01/06/2007
28639/03
SAVENKO
14/06/2007
14/09/2007
4665/04
SEVOSTYANOVA
21/10/2010
21/10/2010
36219/02
SHELOMKOV
05/10/2006
12/02/2007
36045/02
SHNEYDERMAN
11/01/2007
11/04/2007
33914/02
SKOROBOGATOVA
01/12/2005
01/03/2006
3734/02
SOKOLOV
22/09/2005
22/12/2005
33896/04
SOKOREV
18/06/2009
18/09/2009
4487/04
SVETLANA ORLOVA
30/07/2009
30/10/2009
20886/04
TATYANA MAKAROVA
22/12/2009
22/03/2010
13601/05
TERESHKIN
19/02/2013
19/02/2013
19440/05
TOKAZOV
13/01/2011
13/01/2011
7514/05
TROSHKIN
29/10/2009
29/01/2010
20496/04
TUSASHVILI
15/12/2005
15/03/2006
3852/02
UGLANOVA
21/09/2006
21/12/2006
25957/03
UTYUZHNIKOVA
07/10/2010
07/01/2011
75475/01
VASYAGIN
22/09/2005
22/12/2005
13458/07
VDOVINA
18/06/2009
18/09/2009
9311/05
VERSHININ
11/04/2013
11/04/2013
15969/02
VLADIMIR NIKITIN
02/11/2006
02/02/2007
26384/02
VOKHMINA
09/06/2005
09/09/2005
24411/05
VOLODINA
19/04/2011
19/04/2011
10374/02
VOLOVICH
05/10/2006
12/02/2007
42138/02
YAROSLAVTSEV
02/12/2004
02/03/2005
12098/04
YELISEYEV
28/05/2009
28/08/2009
60408/00
YEMANAKOVA
23/09/2004
02/02/2005
34104/04
YERKIMBAYEV
23/10/2008
23/01/2009
42046/06
ZAYTSEV AND OTHERS
25/06/2009
06/11/2009
32380/06
ZHARKOVA
17/09/2009
17/12/2009
70190/01
ZIMENKO
23/06/2005
23/09/2005
Compensatory remedy in respect of violation of the right to trial within a reasonable time
Application
Case
Judgment of
Final on
39874/03
CHERNICHKIN
16/09/2010
21/02/2011
35368/04
CHELIKIDI
10/05/2012
10/08/2012
7531/05
NIKOLAY KOZLOV
16/07/2015
16/10/2015
44150/04
RYABIKINA
07/06/2011
07/09/2011
Criminal proceedings
Application
Case
Judgment of
Final on
46133/99+
SMIRNOVA
24/07/2003
24/10/2003
24490/03
ANDREI ISAYEV
23/09/2010
21/02/2011
4026/03
BAKHITOV
04/12/2008
04/03/2009
16621/05
DAVYDOV
25/11/2010
25/11/2010
31008/02
FEDOROV AND FEDOROVA
13/10/2005
13/01/2006
16595/02
GOLOVKIN
03/04/2008
29/09/2008
35677/05
KARASEV
21/10/2010
21/10/2010
31849/05
KAZYULIN
25/02/2010
25/05/2010
28961/03
KOLCHINAYEV
17/12/2009
17/03/2010
19126/02
KOMAROVA
02/11/2006
02/02/2007
3009/07
KONASHEVSKAYA AND OTHERS
03/06/2010
04/10/2010
11769/04
KRYUK
13/12/2011
13/03/2012
22674/02
OBLOV
15/01/2009
15/04/2009
33655/04
POLOMOSHNOV
21/10/2010
21/10/2010
5511/05
RODIN
22/10/2009
22/01/2010
4459/03
SIDORENKO
08/03/2007
08/06/2007
58104/08
SIZOV No. 2
24/07/2012
24/10/2012
32805/03
SUKHOV
18/06/2009
18/09/2009
20455/04
TUGARINOV
29/04/2010
29/07/2010
942/02
ZEMENTOVA
27/09/2007
27/12/2007
Appendix 2 to Resolution CM/ ResDH ( 2017) 168
Information about the measures to comply with the judgments in 10 6 cases of the Kormacheva , Chernichkin and Smirnova groups against the Russian Federation
I. Case summaries
The cases in the Kormacheva group ( 82 cases) and the Smirnova group ( 20 cases) concern the excessive length of civil and criminal proceedings and the lack of an effective domestic remedy in this respect (violations of Articles 6 § 1 and 13). The Chernichkin group ( four cases) concerns the authorities ’ refusal to examine a claim for compensation in respect of excessively long civil proceedings due to the lack of a relevant legal provision (violation of Article 6 § 1).
In three of these cases the Court also found other violations, namely: a violation of Article 6 § 1 and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the delayed enforcement of domestic judicial decisions concerning monetary awards against the State ( Falimonov , Tokazov ) ( this issue has been examined in the Timofeyev group of cases [1] ); a violation of Article 5 §§ 1 and 3 on account of the repeated detention of the applicants in the course of a criminal investigation on the basis of insufficiently reasoned decisions ( Smirnova ) ( this issue is being examined in the Klyakhin group of cases); and a violation of Article 8 on account of the failure to return the passport to one of the applicants upon her release from custody ( Smirnova ).
II. Individual measures
A) Just satisfaction
In all cases in which the European Court awarded just satisfaction, the relevant sums (including default interest) were paid to the applicants or their representatives under conditions accepted by them (see Annex 3).
B) Domestic proceedings
The impugned domestic proceedings have ended in all the cases concerning excessive length of proceedings. In 94 of them, according to the Court ’ s judgments or information subsequently submitted by the authorities, the domestic proceedings had been brought to an end or discontinued before the adoption of the judgments. In eight other cases ( Baburin , Chevkin , Kazyulin , Kolomiyets , Komarova , Konashevskaya and Others, Kormacheva , Plaksin ), the proceedings ended after the adoption of the Court ’ s judgments (see Appendix 4).
C) Other individual measures
As regards the two cases concerning the delayed enforcement of domestic judicial decisions ( Falimonov , Tokazov ), these decisions had been enforced before the European Court delivered its judgments.
As regards the Smirnova case, the applicants had been released from detention at the time the Court delivered its judgment. In addition, the first applicant ’ s passport had been returned to her upon her second release from custody, on 6 October 1999.
Consequently, no further individual measures appear to be required.
III. General measures
A) Measures taken in response to the violations of Article 6 § 1
1. Legislative and regulatory measures
Various legislative measures were taken with a view to reducing the overall length of judicial proceedings, both civil and criminal.
In particular, a new appellate review procedure was introduced in 2012 for both civil and criminal cases, with the appeal instance acquiring the power to examine new evidence and decide on the merits directly without sending the case back to the lower court for a new trial (with some rare exceptions). This reform has addressed the problem of lengthy proceedings insofar as they were caused by repeated remittals of cases to the first instance for re-examination. Tight deadlines were also set for the appeal courts to examine appeals: three months for civil cases and 45 days for scheduling a hearing for criminal cases.
Notification of parties in both civil and criminal cases via a text message indicating the date, time and venue of the hearing was also introduced in 2013, by a regulation of the Supreme Court ’ s Judicial Department. This process will be finalised when all the national courts are equipped with the necessary technological tools. This appears capable of preventing adjournments of hearings caused by the absence of the parties who had not been duly summoned.
On 23 June 2016, the Codes of Civil and Criminal Procedure were further amended to introduce the possibility of making judicial decisions available to parties within five days of their adoption, including by publishing them online. This has reduced the frequency of requests for extension of the time-limit for appeal.
Additional legislative measures were taken with regard to increasing the efficiency of civil proceedings: the amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure of 28 June 2009 set a deadline for examination of a civil case within two months after the claim was filed. This has helped to prevent long periods of inactivity on the part of judicial authorities, including the periods between the registration of the claim and the first hearing.
Furthermore, in order to reduce the judges ’ workload, an alternative mediation procedure was introduced by a law adopted o n 27 July 2010 ( № 193- FZ) . This law provides the parties to civil proceedings with a possibility to resolve their dispute with the assistance of a mediator, without filing a court action.
The issue of refusal of claims for compensation in respect of excessively long civil proceedings due to the lack of relevant legislation , was resolved by the adoption of the 2010 Compensation Act (see Section C below).
2. Capacity-building and training measures
A number of measures to strengthen the capacity of the national judiciary have been taken, mainly within the scope of the Federal Programme for the Development of the Russian Judicial System.
For these purposes, more than 60 billion roubles (approx. 927 million EUR) were allocated and spent within th is programme between 2007 and 2012 and another 90.6 billion roubles (approx. 1,400 billion EUR) are foreseen for the expenditure for its follow-up federal programme from 2013 until 2020. In general, the Russian judicial system budget continues to increase by providing sustainable funding for the courts, as also noted by the CEPEJ (the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, a body of the Council of Europe). [2]
The number of judges in the courts of general jurisdiction (civil and criminal proceedings) and in the commercial courts was increased by more than 2000 between 2005 and 2015, and the number of justices of the peace by more than 40%. Additionally, the position of federal judge assistant was introduced in all courts which has allowed judicial proceedings to be significantly expedited .
In the same period, 41 new courts and 32 representations of permanent judicial bodies were opened. A number of staff were reassigned from less busy courts to the ones with the heaviest workload s .
In order to improve the technical conditions for the functioning of courthouses, 400 buildings in total were constructed, renovated or purchased between 2005 and 2015.
Modern IT tools were introduced to the courts, including advanced hardware and software. More than 1,500 federal courts were equipped with computers and other technical facilities and tools. Official websites of all federal courts of general jurisdiction and a common public information space for judges and citizens (“ Pravosudiye ”) were created. These measures are capable of reducing the time spent on searching for case-files and data, to prevent the loss of documents, to ensure quick and easy access to information and to reduce the overall length of proceedings.
Other measures currently underway include the introduction of electronic administration of proceedings, automatic notification of parties to the proceedings about the date, time and venue of court hearings, as well as the introduction of internet broadcasting of public court hearings.
T he Supreme Court has organised special training sessions and annual meetings with judges of courts of general jurisdiction and justices of the peace to raise their awareness o f the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time. It also regularly issues thematic reviews, including extracts from the European Court ’ s caselaw , to ensure uniformity of judicial practice. The University of Justice (previously the Academy of Justice) has also provided initial and advanced training to judges and other court officials, including on the issue of the length of proceedings. Between 2005 and 2014, more than 18,000 judges and 98,000 other court officials participated in various training events at the University of Justice.
B) Measures taken in response to the violation of Article 8
The violation of the applicant ’ s right to respect for her private life in the Smirnova case was an isolated incident. The authorities stressed that the awareness raising measures described in Section D below are sufficient to prevent similar violations in the future.
C) Measures taken in response to the violations of Article 13
The law providing for a domestic remedy in respect of excessively lengthy judicial and enforcement proceedings as well as of pre-trial criminal proceedings ("the Compensation Act" – Federal Law No. 68-FZ) entered into force on 4 May 2010. This law provides for both a compensatory and acceleratory remedy.
1. Compensatory remedy
A complaint in respect of excessively lengthy judicial proceedings must be submitted within six months following the end of the impugned proceedings. If the proceedings last longer than three years in civil and four years in criminal matters, the complaint can be submitted without awaiting the end of the proceedings. As accompanying measures to the 2010 Compensation Act, the Plena of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Commercial Court issued a joint ruling with guidelines clarifying its implementation which was updated in March 2016, with additional clarifications.
This remedy has already been examined by the Committee of Ministers in the context of non-enforcement of domestic judgments awarding monetary compensation against s tate authorities. In November 2011, the Committee of Ministers considered this remedy to be sufficient (see Interim Resolution CM/ ResDH ( 2011)293) and closed the supervision of the cases concerned in September 2016.
With regard to the excessively lengthy civil and criminal proceedings, the European Court has also characterised this new remedy as prima facie effective (see, for example, Fakhretdinov v. Russian Federation, Application N o. 26716/09, decision of 23 September 2010, §§ 27 and 31, concerning lengthy criminal proceedings; Palacheva v. Russian Federation, Application No. 39814/04, judgment of 19/06/2014, concerning lengthy civil proceedings). Notably, in Stolyarova ( Application No. 15658/09, decision of 28/06/2016), the Court noted that the applicant had successfully used the Compensation Act and received appropriate compensation for the lengthy civil proceedings.
2. Acceleratory remedy
In 2010, a new provision was introduced to the Codes of Civil and Criminal Procedure (Article 6.1) according to which the parties to the proceedings can now request acceleration thereof when their civil or criminal cases have not been examined for a long time, i.e. within the time-limits prescribed by law (see Section A above) . The president of the court is to review such requests within five days and can set hearing dates or indicate other specific action to be taken by the judge. When examining a request for acceleration, the president of the court takes into account such factors as the complexity of the case, the conduct of the parties, the actions already taken by the court and other criteria.
D) Publication and dissemination measures
The government has taken publication and dissemination measures to ensure that various s tate authorities are aware of the Convention standards concerning the requirement to conduct judicial proceedings within a reasonable time and other rights at issue. The judgments of the European Court were disseminated to all the authorities concerned, often with explanatory notes and recommendations. The judgments were also translated and published.
E) Assessment of the impact of the measures taken
The vast majority of civil and criminal cases are now considered within the time-limits fixed by domestic legislation. The number of cases considered outside of such time-limits has decreased since 2005 when compared with 2014, as follows: from previously 6 ,9 % to 1,4% in civil cases and from previously 3,4% to 0,8% in criminal cases.
According to the CEPEJ Report on “European Judicial Systems – Edition 2014 (2012 Data): Efficiency and Quality of Justice”, the disposition time (ratio between pending cases and resolved cases) of both civil and criminal cases in the Russian Federation is the shortest in Europe, with a clearance rate (ratio between resolved cases and incoming cases) of 99 to 100%. According to the latest 2016 CEPEJ Report (2014 data), the data stayed the same in 2014, and the disposition time was considered satisfactory.
F) Other violations found
The general measures in response to the other violations found by the European Court in these cases have been or are being examined within the context of the relevant groups, as indicated in the case description (see above).
IV. Conclusions of the respondent State
The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences of the violations of the Convention found by the European Court in these cases and that these measures will prevent similar violations in future. The Russian Federation has, therefore, complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
Appendix 3: List of payment of just satisfaction
CIVIL PROCEEDINGS
No.
App.
Case
Judgment final on
Sums awarded by the Court
(in EUR, unless specified otherwise)
Payment deadline
Date of payment of the sums awarded by the Court
Payment of default interest
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
53084/99
KORMACHEVA
14/06/2004
-
3 000
200
14/09/2004
12/08/2004
-
28222/06
ABORINA
11/04/2013
-
4 000
16
11/07/2013
08/07/2013
n/a
33820/04
ANGELOVA
13/03/2008
-
2 900
220
13/06/2008
03/04/2008
n/a
30395/04
AVAKOVA
22/09/2006
-
3 000
200
22/12/2006
01/11/2006
n/a
55520/00
BABURIN
24/06/2005
-
3 000
100
24/09/2005
21/09/2005
n/a
22892/03
BAKIYEVETS
15/09/2006
-
-
-
-
-
-
22721/04
BARANTSEVA
04/06/2010
-
3 600
380
04/09/2010
19/07/2010
n/a
4171/03
CHEVKIN
15/09/2006
-
4 000
480
15/12/2006
07/12/2006
n/a
42277/04
DOVIDYAN
15/01/2010
-
1 500
-
15/04/2010
22/03/2010
n/a
38321/03
DZHIGARKHANOV
21/10/2010
-
2 400
5
21/01/2011
29/04/2011
paid
11549/02
FALIMONOV
29/09/2008
-
3 500
-
29/12/2008
26/12/2008
n/a
23310/04
GASANOVA
30/07/2009
-
2 400
10
30/10/2009
19/10/2009
n/a
10929/03
GLAZKOV
12/01/2007
-
3 000
200
12/04/2007
03/04/2007
n/a
20882/04
GOROVAYA
22/03/2010
-
2 000
-
22/06/2010
25/05/2010
n/a
34171/04
GUBER
23/01/2009
-
1 000
-
23/04/2009
14/04/2009
n/a
10994/05
KARTASHEV
13/01/2011
-
5 500
200
13/04/2011
04/05/2011
paid
24427/02
KAYANKIN
11/05/2010
-
2 000
-
11/08/2010
19/07/2010
n/a
39898/03
KHARITONOV
16/10/2009
-
2 000
-
16/01/2010
26/11/2009
n/a
5507/06
KIRILL MARCHENKO
09/01/2009
-
3 600
-
09/04/2009
27/03/2009
n/a
76964/01
KIRSANOVA
22/09/2006
-
2 000
-
22/12/2006
14/11/2006
n/a
76835/01
KOLOMIYETS
22/05/2007
-
-
-
-
-
-
25224/04
KOZYAK
13/01/2011
-
2 000
-
13/04/2011
13/05/2011
paid
44374/04
KUDINOVA
02/02/2007
-
3 000
14
02/05/2007
15/03/2007
n/a
24827/06
KUPRINY
25/05/2010
-
2 800
-
25/08/2010
15/09/2010
paid
44436/06
KURBATOV
02/01/2009
-
1 500
425
02/04/2009
20/03/2009
n/a
12049/02
KUTSENKO
01/09/2006
-
1 500
-
01/12/2006
28/11/2006
n/a
22118/02
KUZIN
09/09/2005
-
3 000
200
09/12/2005
11/10/2005
n/a
43372/06
LEKHANOVA
22/03/2010
-
3 600
480
22/06/2010
25/05/2010
n/a
20441/02
LELIK
03/09/2010
-
1 500
825
03/12/2010
17/12/2010
paid
63527/00
LEVSHINY
30/03/2005
-
2 400
52
30/06/2005
21/06/2005
n/a
29510/04
MARCHENKO
05/01/2007
-
-
-
-
-
n/a
13119/03
MARKOVA
08/04/2009
-
1 500
100
08/07/2009
24/08/2009
paid
28602/02
MARUSEVA
29/08/2008
-
2 100
47
29/11/2008
02/10/2008
n/a
30019/05
MIKHAYLOVICH
05/06/2009
-
3 600
700
05/09/2009
04/09/2009
n/a
16141/05
MP KINESKOP
22/03/2010
-
2 000
-
22/06/2010
23/09/2010
n/a (the applicant provided his bank account details in full after the payment deadline)
9619/05
NOZHKOV
19/02/2013
-
2 600
-
19/05/2013
27/06/2013
n/a (the applicant provided his bank account details after the payment deadline)
77089/01
OLSHANNIKOVA
29/09/2006
-
3 000
-
29/12/2006
18/12/2006
n/a
21088/06
ORLOVA
09/01/2009
-
3 600
275
09/04/2009
29/07/2011
paid
39814/04
PALACHEVA
19/06/2014
-
2 200
200
19/09/2014
02/09/2014
n/a
11496/05
PANCHENKO
11/06/2015
-
1 250
-
11/09/2015
07/09/2015
n/a
14949/02
PLAKSIN
10/11/2004
-
2 400
-
10/02/2005
02/02/2005
-
27865/06
PLEMYANOVA
15/01/2010
-
3 000
710
15/04/2010
07/06/2010
paid
31948/05
POSPEKH
02/05/2013
-
2 000
-
02/08/2013
01/04/2015
paid
28954/02
RASH
13/04/2005
-
1 600
50
13/07/2005
21/06/2005
n/a
18072/04
REDNIKOV
06/12/2011
-
2 400
-
06/03/2012
15/02/2012
n/a
9941/03
ROLGEZER AND OTHERS
29/07/2008
-
58 000 (in total)
60
29/10/2008
09/10/2008,
16/10/2008,
17/10/2008, 31/10/2008
Not significant (EUR 0.79 not paid)
19457/02
ROMANENKO AND ROMANENKO
19/01/2007
-
900
1 700
19/04/2007
06/06/2007, 19/09/2007
paid
22554/04
RUBTSOVA
13/01/2011
-
2 900
-
13/04/2011
04/05/2011
paid
21774/06
RYAZANTSEV
10/03/2011
-
1 500
71
10/06/2011
07/06/2011
n/a
14983/04
RYBAKOV
22/03/2006
-
3 300
129
22/06/2006
22/06/2006
n/a
16004/04
RYPAKOVA
08/04/2009
-
2 000
-
08/07/2009
24/08/2009
paid
924/03
RYSEV
18/09/2009
-
-
-
-
-
-
38015/03
SALAMATINA
01/06/2007
-
1 500
-
01/09/2007
11/09/2007
paid
28639/03
SAVENKO
14/09/2007
-
3 000
-
14/12/2007
03/12/2007
n/a
4665/04
SEVOSTYANOVA
21/10/2010
-
-
-
-
-
-
36219/02
SHELOMKOV
12/02/2007
-
4 400
200
12/05/2007
27/04/2007
n/a
36045/02
SHNEYDERMAN
11/04/2007
-
6 200
-
11/07/2007
01/08/2007
paid
33914/02
SKOROBOGATOVA
01/03/2006
-
2 000
-
01/06/2006
18/05/2006
n/a
3734/02
SOKOLOV
22/12/2005
-
2 400
-
22/03/2006
16/01/2006
n/a
33896/04
SOKOREV
18/09/2009
-
-
-
-
-
-
4487/04
SVETLANA ORLOVA
30/10/2009
-
2 100
-
30/01/2010
22/12/2009
n/a
20886/04
TATYANA MAKAROVA
22/03/2010
-
2 000
-
22/06/2010
14/07/2010
paid
13601/05
TERESHKIN
19/02/2013
-
4 500
-
19/05/2013
19/06/2013
paid
19440/05
TOKAZOV
13/01/2011
-
6 200
-
13/04/2011
06/05/2011
paid
7514/05
TROSHKIN
29/01/2010
-
3 000
-
29/04/2010
22/03/2010
n/a
20496/04
TUSASHVILI
15/03/2006
-
1 500
825
15/06/2006
09/06/2006
n/a
3852/02
UGLANOVA
21/12/2006
-
2 400
30
21/03/2007
13/03/2007
n/a
25957/03
UTYUZHNIKOVA
07/01/2011
-
750-
07/04/2011
29/04/2011
paid
75475/01
VASYAGIN
22/12/2005
-
-
-
-
-
-
13458/07
VDOVINA
18/09/2009
-
3 600
-
18/12/2009
22/01/2010
Not significant (EUR 16.40 not paid)
9311/05
VERSHININ
11/04/2013
-
2 100
-
11/07/2013
27/06/2013
n/a
15969/02
VLADIMIR NIKITIN
02/02/2007
-
5 900
25
02/05/2007
23/04/2007
n/a
26384/02
VOKHMINA
09/09/2005
-
-
-
-
-
-
24411/05
VOLODINA
19/04/2011
-
2 400
-
19/07/2011
24/06/2011
n/a
10374/02
VOLOVICH
12/02/2007
-
4 400
RUR 548
12/05/2007
11/05/2007
n/a
42138/02
YAROSLAVTSEV
02/03/2005
-
1 600
-
02/06/2005
21/03/2005
n/a
12098/04
YELISEYEV
28/08/2009
-
2 400
-
28/11/2009
01/12/2009
Not significant (EUR 0.94 not paid)
60408/00
YEMANAKOVA
02/02/2005
-
1 000
-
02/05/2005
21/03/2005
n/a
34104/04
YERKIMBAYEV
23/01/2009
-
2 900
-
23/04/2009
23/04/2009
n/a
42046/06
ZAYTSEV AND OTHERS
06/11/2009
-
2 400
600
06/02/2010
19/03/2010
paid
32380/06
ZHARKOVA
17/12/2009
-
4 800
31
17/03/2010
19/03/2010
Not significant (EUR 1.26 not paid)
70190/01
ZIMENKO
23/09/2005
-
3 000
-
23/12/2005
06/12/2005
n/a
COMPENSATORY REMEDY
No.
App.
Case
Judgment, final on
Sums awarded by the Court
Payment Deadline
Date of payment of the sums awarded by the Court
Payment of default interest
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
39874/03
CHERNICHKIN
21/02/2011
-
7 200
1 000
21/05/2011
13/05/2011
n/a
35368/04
CHELIKIDI
10/08/2012
-
6 000
-
10/11/2012
14/09/2012
n/a
7531/05
Nikolay KOZLOV
16/10/2015
-
6 000
-
16/01/2016
18/12/2015
n/a
44150/04
RYABIKINA
07/09/2011
-
7 200
-
07/12/2011
05/10/2011
n/a
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
No.
App.
Case
Judgment, final on
Sums awarded by the Court
Payment Deadline
Date of payment of the sums awarded by the Court
Payment of default interest
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
46133/99
SMIRNOVA
24/10/2003
-
5 500
1 000
24/01/2004
20/01/2004
n/a
24490/03
ANDREY ISAYEV
21/02/2011
-
-
-
-
-
-
4026/03
BAKHITOV
04/03/2009
-
2 700
-
04/06/2009
06/05/2009
n/a
16621/05
DAVYDOV
25/11/2010
-
3 000
-
25/02/2011
29/04/2011
paid
31008/02
FEDOROV AND FEDOROVA
13/01/2006
-
6 600
-
13/04/2006
22/02/2006
n/a
16595/02
GOLOVKIN
29/09/2008
-
5 600
-
29/12/2008
19/12/2008
n/a
35677/05
KARASEV
21/10/2010
-
1 700
-
21/01/2011
12/09/2014 ( date of last invitation to the applicant to submit his bank account details)
n/a (the applicant has failed for many years to submit his bank account details)
31849/05
KAZYULIN
25/05/2010
-
6 700
-
25/08/2010
19/07/2010
n/a
9. 9. 9.
28961/03
KOLCHINAYEV
17/03/2010
-
1 500
-
17/06/2010
14/07/2010
paid
10. 1 1 0.
19126/02
KOMAROVA
02/02/2007
-
4 200
-
02/05/2007
05/04/2007
n/a
110. 11.
3009/07
KONASHEVSKAYA AND OTHERS
04/10/2010
-
10 800
-
04/01/2011
03/12/2010
-
11. 11 2 .
11769/04
KRYUK
13/03/2012
-
2 400
300
13/06/2012
30/05/2012
n/a
12. 1 13 .
22674/02
OBLOV
15/04/2009
-
2 700
-
15/07/2009
26/08/2009
paid
13. 1 14 .
33655/04
POLOMOSHNOV
21/10/2010
-
-
-
-
-
-
14. 1 15 .
5511/05
RODIN
22/01/2010
-
4 2000
-
22/04/2010
22/04/2010
n/a
15. 1 16 .
4459/03
SIDORENKO
08/06/2007
-
-
-
-
-
-
16. 11 7 .
58104/08
SIZOV (NO. 2)
24/10/2012
-
2 000
-
24/01/2013
16/11/2012
n/a
17. 11 8 .
32805/03
SUKHOV
18/09/2009
-
3 600
-
18/12/2009
16/01/2010
paid
18. 11 9 .
20455/04
TUGARINOV
29/07/2010
-
2 400
95
29/10/2010
02/12/2010
paid
19. 1 20 .
942/02
ZEMENTOVA
27/12/2007
-
3 000
-
27/03/2008
19/03/2008
n/a
Appendix 4: Domestic proceedings brought to an end after the adoption of the European Court ’ s judgments
CIVIL PROCEEDINGS
No.
Appl. No.
Case
Judgment of
Domestic proceedings ended
1.
55520/00
BABURIN
24/03/2005
On 27/05/2005, the Kuybyshevskiy District Court of St. Petersburg delivered its judgment which became final on 10/08/2005, after being upheld on appeal.
2.
4171/03
CHEVKIN
15/06/2006
On 21/03/2006, the Tula Regional Court delivered its final judgment .
3.
76835/01
KOLOMIYETS
22/02/2007
On 25/12/2007, the Kireyevskiy District Court of Tula region delivered its judgment which became final on 20/03/2008, after being upheld on appeal.
4.
53084/99
KORMACHEVA
29/01/2004
On 20/06/2004, the Anadirskyi District Court of Chukotka region delivered its ruling in the compensatory proceedings which became final on 4/11/2004, after being upheld on appeal.
5.
14949/02
PLAKSIN
29/04/2004
On 11/03/2005, the Pyatigorsk Town Court delivered its judgment which became final on 13/05/2005, after being upheld on appeal.
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
No.
Appl. No.
Case
Judgment of
Domestic proceedings ended
1.
31849/05
KAZYULIN
25/05/2010
On 16/06/2008, the Pervomayskiy District Court of the Tambov Region delivered its sentence which became final on 22/07/2008, after being upheld on appeal.
2.
19126/02
KOMAROVA
02/11/2006
On 20/10/2006, the Zavolzhskiy District Court of Yaroslavl delivered its sentence which was amended on appeal and became final on 04/03/2008.
3.
3009/07
KONASHEVSKAYA AND OTHERS
03/06/2010
On 21/09/2009, the Babushkinskiy District Court of Moscow delivered its judgment in the case of Konashevskaya , which was upheld on appeal and became final on 2/11/2009.
[1] See Final Resolution CM/ ResDH ( 2016)268 adopted by the Committee of Ministers at its 1265 th meeting (September 2016) (DH).
[2] CEPEJ report on European Judicial Systems – Edition 2016 (2014 data): Efficiency and Quality of Justice, CEPEJ Studies No. 23.