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.
USHANOV v. RUSSIA and 3 other applications
Doc ref: 9604/17;18827/17;26352/17;42552/17 • ECHR ID: 001-181922
Document date: March 9, 2018
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 4
USHANOV v. RUSSIA and 3 other applications
Doc ref: 9604/17;18827/17;26352/17;42552/17 • ECHR ID: 001-181922
Document date: March 9, 2018
Cited paragraphs only
Communicated on 9 March 2018
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 9604/17 Aleksandr Vladimirovich USHANOV against Russia and 3 other applications (see list appended)
The applicants are Russian nationals living in various regions of the Russian Federation. The application numbers, dates, the applicants ’ names and their personal details are set out in the table below.
The circumstances of the cases
The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.
On various dates the applicants brought proceedings against private parties and obtained final court decisions in their favour. The decisions, by which private persons were ordered to pay the applicants certain sums, became final and enforceable.
The Bailiffs ’ Service initiated enforcement proceedings against the debtors. Discontented with the lack of progress in the enforcement proceedings, some of the applicants applied to have the bailiffs ’ actions or inaction recognised as unlawful. The domestic courts ruled in the applicants ’ favour.
The applicants initiated civil proceedings under Article 1069 of the Civil Code against the respective State authorities, claiming monetary relief for the State ’ s failure to assist them in enforcing the judgments against the private parties. Some applicants were denied monetary relief, while others found their award to be too small.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complain under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention of a failure by the State to provide them adequate and efficient legal assistance in the enforcement of judgments against private parties.
QUESTIONS to the parties
1 . Have the judgments delivered in the applicants ’ favour been enforced? If so, what is the date of the full enforcement of each judgement?
2 . Did the State authorities duly assist the applicants in the enforcement of the judgments against private parties, as required by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? ( see Kesyan v. Russia , no. 36496/02, §§ 64-65, 19 October 2006; Kunashko v. Russia , no. 36337/03 , § § 38-39, 17 December 2009; and Smagilov v. Russia ( dec. ), no. 24324/05, § 37, 13 November 2014)
3 . Did the applicants exhaust the available domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, in respect of their complaints concerning the State ’ s assistance in the enforcement of the judgments in their favour? If so, were they provided appropriate redress?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Lodged on
Applicant ’ s name
date of birth
place of residence
Domestic judgment
in applicant ’ s favour
Article 1069 proceedings
(final domestic decisions)
9604/17
16/01/2017
Aleksandr Vladimirovich USHANOV
20/11/1956
Kaliningrad
Moskovskiy District Court of Kaliningrad on
29 October 2008,
22 January 2010,
7 September 2010,
18 December 2012,
18 December 2012,
26 November 2013,
2 September 2016
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on
30 September 2016
18827/17
21/02/2017
Yelena Mikhaylovna KUZNETSOVA
19/06/1966
Tver
Sovetskiy District Court of Vladivostok on
28 February 2007
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on
5 September 2016
26352/17
13/03/2017
Valeriy Mikhaylovich TOKUNOV
18/12/1954
Anapa
Anapa Town Court of the Krasnodar Region on
23 November 2012
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on
21 September 2016
42552/17
07/06/2017
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich BARSUKOV
06/06/1978
Kursk
Novoanninskiy District Court of the Volgograd Region on
28 January 2003
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on
15 February 2017
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
