Published on 9 October 2023

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 42935/21 Myroslav Borysovych TYMOSHENKO against Russia and 10 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 10 July 2023

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The applications originate from the conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation. They concern the property rights to a number of land plots with or without buildings on them located in various parts of Crimea.

Between 2003 and 2009 the applicants acquired titles to their respective land plots by either completing the privatisation process pursuant to the decisions of Ukrainian authorities, or by purchasing the land plots from their previous owners who had privatised them before. By the time the Russian Federation asserted its jurisdiction over Crimea in 2014 most applicants had registered their full ownership titles under Ukrainian law. In application no. 51094/22 it was the applicant’s late father who had privatised the land plot in question in 2003, to a part of which the applicant succeeded and then formalised his title by a final decision of a Russian court in 2020.

The Federal Constitutional Law of the Russian Federation No. 6-FKZ of 21 March 2014 (hereinafter referred as “6-FKZ”), which formalised assertion of Russian jurisdiction over Crimea under Russian law, provided for transitional arrangements aimed at homogenising the regulation of, among other things, property and land rights and relations in Crimea and Sevastopol with the legal regime established in the Russian Federation.

The “Sevastopol City Law no. 46-SZ of 25 July 2014 on particularities of legal regulation of property and land issues” and the “Law of the Republic of Crimea no. 38-ZRK of 31 July 2014 on particularities of legal regulation of property and land issues”, which were adopted as part of such arrangements for Sevastopol and Crimea accordingly, guaranteed continuity of the rights to the land acquired by private individuals under Ukrainian law prior to the entry into force of the 6-FKZ, unless the individual in question belonged to a certain exceptional category of land owners or users or the land in question was regarded as public domain under Russian law.

The new legal regime required that all land plots and the requisite titles to them be re-registered under Russian law in the corresponding registers and cadastres. The applicants in applications nos. 42935/21 and 6825/22 have successfully done so. The applicant in application no. 51094/22 has had his title initially registered under Russian law, having inherited it from his late father. Other applicants did not re-register their titles, while the respective transitional arrangements allowing them to do so are to be partially in force until 1 January 2025.

On 20 March 2020 the President of the Russian Federation issued the Decree No. 201 (hereinafter referred to as “Decree No. 201”) recognising vast parts of Crimea as Russia’s “border territories”. Under Russian law, foreigners, stateless persons, and foreign legal entities cannot own land in such territories. The applicants, all of whom are Ukrainian nationals residing outside of Crimea, whose land plots were located within these newly defined “border territories”, had thus been given one year, until 20 March 2021, to dispose of them. After this transitionary period expired, the Russian state and municipal authorities have become entitled to sue the owners of land plots not disposed of in order to forcibly sell them or to claim them for public needs with compensation.

The applicant in application no. 42935/21 sold his land to a third party on 10 March 2021. According to him, the price had been significantly lower than the then existing market price, the reason being the approaching deadline for the disposal and the lack of options to keep the land.

The applicant in application no. 6825/22 gifted her land to her father on 16 July 2021. He resided in Crimea and, according to the applicant, had Russian nationality imposed on him. Although the applicant disposed of the land after the statutory deadline had expired, this did not preclude the Russian authorities from registering the deal and her father’s title.

The applicants in all other applications did not dispose of their land within the provided transitionary period or past it. They, however, remain owners of the land, since, as appears from the case files, Russian authorities have not sued them in order to sell or claim their land plots. As none of the applicants resided in Crimea, they were mostly unaware of the fate of their land.

None of the applicants have challenged the Decree No. 201 in courts, the reasons being the ban on entering Crimea imposed by the Russian authorities as part of the Covid-related restrictions, as well as the applicants’ lack of trust in the Russian courts. According to them, the only effective way for them and other Ukrainian nationals to preserve their land in Crimea would be to apply for Russian nationality, which they believe has been the main goal behind the adoption of the Decree No. 201.

Relying on Article 14 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 thereto the applicants raise the following complaints against the Russian Federation.

They argue that the requirement for them to dispose of their titles in land constituted a control of the use of their property, which has been arbitrary, did not pursue a legitimate aim and was not provided for by law. They also argue that the Russian authorities’ entitlement to forcibly sell their land or claim it constituted a potential de facto expropriation of their property. According to them, this measure was arbitrary, did not pursue a legitimate aim and was not provided for by law.

The applicants also argue that such measure was discriminatory, as they have been subjected to a different treatment than Ukrainian nationals residing in Crimea on whom the Russian nationality had been imposed. In this regard they rely on Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 thereto.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Have the applicants complied with the admissibility criteria set out in Article 35 of the Convention?

2. Do the facts to which the applicants refer constitute a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention?

3. Have the applicants suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions on the ground of their Ukrainian nationality and place of residence, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 thereto?

4. Did the alleged acts which gave rise to the applicants’ complaints have a basis in “law” within the meaning of the Convention provisions relied on by them?

APPENDIX

List of applications

No.

Application no.

Case name

Lodged on

Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality

Represented by

Identification of property

1.

42935/21

Tymoshenko

v. Russia

20/08/2021

Myroslav Borysovych TYMOSHENKO 1981 Kyiv Ukrainian

Roman

Yuriyovych MARTYNOVSKYY

824 sq. m of land with unfinished construction on it, located in Sevastopol; the land plot was privatised by the applicant with his title registered under Ukrainian law on 2 June 2009

2.

50851/21

Grushko

v. Russia

01/10/2021

Olga

Ivanivna GRUSHKO 1957 Ivano-Frankivsk Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLEV

416 sq. m of land located in Sevastopol, privatised by the applicant for gardening with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 22 September 2009; on 12 December 2013 the applicant also registered her title in a house of 34.8 sq. m constructed on her land

3.

57455/21

Korolevych

v. Russia

04/11/2021

Olga

Bogdanivna KOROLEVYCH 1960 Lviv Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLYEV

403 sq. m of land with unfinished construction on it, located in Sevastopol; the land plot was privatised by the applicant with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 4 August 2009

4.

6310/22

Leontyev and Stasenko

v. Russia

19/01/2022

Stanislav Viktorovych LEONTYEV 1967 Kharkiv Ukrainian Ganna Valerianivna STASENKO 1965 Kharkiv Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLYEV

Two plots of land with unregistered houses, located in Feodosiya within the allotment association “Energetyk” and identified as follows:

- no. 82, of 564 sq. m, purchased by the applicants, a married couple, from a third party; the title was registered under Ukrainian law in the first applicant’s name on 20 November 2007

- no. 77, of 981 sq. m, privatised by the second applicant with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 20 November 2007

5.

6395/22

Anishchenko

v. Russia

19/01/2022

Denys Borysovych ANISHCHENKO 1977 Kharkiv Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLEV

0.12 ha of land, identified as plot no. 167, located in Feodosiya within the allotment association “Energetyk”, privatised by the applicant with his title registered under Ukrainian law on 17 April 2007

6.

6398/22

Vakulovska

v. Russia

19/01/2022

Larysa Leonidivna VAKULOVSKA 1958 Kyiv Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLEV

804 sq. m of land with an unregistered house, identified as plot no. 163, located in Feodosiya within the allotment association “Veteran”, privatised by the applicant with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 8 April 2008

7.

6799/22

Stezhko

v. Russia

19/01/2022

Yuliya Valentynivna STEZHKO 1976 Velyka Bugayivka Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLYEV

580 sq. m of land located in Alupka, purchased by the applicant from a third party with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 17 August 2007; the applicant planned to construct a house on her land and obtained the necessary permission

8.

6825/22

Domanchuk

v. Russia

26/01/2022

Liliya Oleksandrivna DOMANCHUK 1975 Kyiv Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLYEV

631 sq. m of land with a house of 64.3 sq. m located in Yalta, inherited by the applicant from her late grandfather with her titles to the land plot and the house registered under Ukrainian law on 30 September 2008 and 23 October 2008, respectively

9.

10829/22

Yeremenko-Afana

v. Russia

04/02/2022

Galyna

Igorivna YEREMENKO-AFANA 1963 Kharkiv Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLEV

0.1 ha of land, identified as plot no. 132, located in Sudak within the allotment association “Kapsel”, privatised by the applicant with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 17 July 2008

10.

10849/22

Leonenko

v. Russia

04/02/2022

Oleksiy Viktorovych LEONENKO 1982 Kyiv Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLEV

600 sq. m of land, identified as plot no. 51, located in Leninskyy district within the allotment association “Aktash”, privatised by the applicant for gardening with his title registered under Ukrainian law on 3 February 2009; on 13 September 2012 the applicant also registered his title in a house of 68.2 sq. m constructed on his land

11.

51094/22

Lozytskyy

v. Russia

17/10/2022

Oleksandr Sergiyovych LOZYTSKYY 1987 Zhytomyr Ukrainian

Andriy

Viktorovych YAKOVLYEV

1/3 of the land plot of 446 sq. m located in Feodosiya, inherited by the applicant from his late father with the applicant’s title registered under Russian law on 13 June 2017; on 14 July 2020 a Russian court also recognized the applicant’s right to 7/30 of the real estate located on this land plot, composed of, inter alia , two houses of 96.2 and 73.4 sq. m and auxiliary buildings; the applicant registered his title in the real estate under Russian law on 1 February 2021