CASE OF ZUBKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIACONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE DEDOV
Doc ref: • ECHR ID:
Document date: November 7, 2017
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE DEDOV
I ought to point out that in the Bykov judgment ( Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 111, 10 March 2009) the Grand Chamber considered that the applicant had suffered non-pecuniary damage which was not sufficiently compensated by the finding of a violation of the Convention. Considering the circumstances of the case and having made its assessment on an equitable basis, the Court has awarded the applicant EUR 1,000 under the head.
I believe that the above approach (involving a symbolic amount of compensation) is applicable to all other “surveillance” cases with similar circumstances, namely when the Court has found a violation of Article 8, but the surveillance measures were in fact necessary, and the domestic proceedings in the applicant ’ s case were not contrary to the requirements of a fair trial (see Bykov , § 104).
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant ’ s name
Year of birth
Place of residence
Representative
29431/05
28 June 2005
Mr Maksim Sergeyevich ZUBKOV
1979
Novgorod
7070/06
9 January 2006
Mr Andrey Sergeyevich IPPOLITOV
1975
Tver
Mr N . K ulik , a lawyer practising in Tver
5402/07
12 January 2007
Mr Andrey V yacheslavovich GORBUNOV
1964
Vladimir
Mr M . O vchinnikov
and Mr A. Mikhaylov , lawyers practising in Vladimir