FIRST SECTION

Application no . 14191/06 Vasiliy Vasilyevich RUDOV against Russia lodged on 24 February 2006

STATEMENT OF FACTS

THE FACTS

The applicant, M r Vasiliy Vasilyevich Rudov , is a Russian national, who was born in 1960 and lives in Sertolovo , the Leningrad Region . He is represented before the Court by Mr R.A. Zarbeyev , a lawyer practising in St Petersburg.

The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant is a former military serviceman. Between October 2001 and October 2002 he served in military unit no. 83772 of the Russian peacekeeping contingent in Ugl j evik , Bosnia and Herzegovina .

Upon his return to Russia , he brought proceedings against his military unit for the failure to pay him the settlement allowance of 64,486 Russian roubles (2,318 USD) for his service abroad .

On 18 May 2005 the Military Court of the Sertolovo Garrison rejected his claim. In its decision the court referred to decision of the Committee of Ministers of the Soviet Union no. 223-57 of 18 February 1988 and to decision of the Russian Government no. 143 of 6 March 2003. The texts of both documents were never published due to their secret nature. The applicant was unable to obtain the texts of the documents.

The applicant appealed against the decision to the Leningrad Circuit Military Court stating that he was unable to obtain the text of the regulations which served as the basis for the decision of the first instance court.

On 25 August 2005 the Leningrad Circuit Military Court upheld the decision of the first instance court referring to the same regulations.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains under Article 6 § of the Convention about a violation of equality of arms in the proceedings concerning his claim for the allowance.

Under Article 1 of Protocol 1 he complains that the refusal of the domestic courts to grant his claim for the allowance infringed his right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.

QUESTION

Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in the proceedings concerning the settlement allowance ? In particular, was the principle of equality of arms complied with by the domestic courts?