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

CASE OF TITARENKO AGAINST UKRAINE AND 7 OTHER CASES

Doc ref: 31720/02;45947/06;69250/11;1858/08;38092/18;7218/19;5353/14;43961/19 • ECHR ID: 001-214834

Document date: December 2, 2021

  • Inbound citations: 15
  • Cited paragraphs: 1
  • Outbound citations: 0

CASE OF TITARENKO AGAINST UKRAINE AND 7 OTHER CASES

Doc ref: 31720/02;45947/06;69250/11;1858/08;38092/18;7218/19;5353/14;43961/19 • ECHR ID: 001-214834

Document date: December 2, 2021

Cited paragraphs only

Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)429

Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Eight cases against Ukraine

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 2 December 2021

at the 1419 th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

Application No.

Case

Judgment of

Final on

31720/02

TITARENKO

20/09/2012

20/12/2012

45947/06

KOBERNIK

25/07/2013

25/10/2013

69250/11

ALEKSANDR VLADIMIROVICH SMIRNOV

13/03/2014

13/06/2014

1858/08

LAVRINYUK

04/12/2018

04/12/2018

38092/18

LYSENKO

19/09/2019

19/09/2019

7218/19+

DYKUSARENKO

09/04/2020

09/04/2020

5353/14+

BORZYKH AND OTHERS

25/06/2020

25/06/2020

43961/19

VYNOGRADSKYY

22/10/2020

22/10/2020

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 on account of poor conditions of detention and lack of effective remedies thereof; unfair or excessively lengthy criminal proceedings; denial of family visits in pre-trial detention; shortcomings in the pre-trial detention and failure to comply with obligations under Article 34 of the Convention ;

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 invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with the above-mentioned obligation;

Having examined the action plan provided by the government indicating the individual measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgments, including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2021)1047 );

Considering that the question of individual measures was resolved, given that the just satisfaction has been paid and the applicants are no longer in detention;

Recalling that the question of general measures required in response to the shortcomings found by the Court in the present judgments continues to be examined within the framework of the Sukachov, Nevmerzhitsky, Yakovenko and Melnik v. Ukraine, Merit v. Ukraine, Yaremenko v. Ukraine (No. 2), Balitskyy v. Ukraine, Shalimov v. Ukraine, Ignatov v. Ukraine and Naydyon v. Ukraine groups of cases and that the closure of these cases therefore in no way prejudges the Committee’s evaluation of the general required;

DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases as regards the individual measures and

DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 398107 • Paragraphs parsed: 43931842 • Citations processed 3409255