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

CASE OF NIKOGHOSYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA

Doc ref: 4396/21;12858/21;22844/22 • ECHR ID: 001-229422

Document date: December 14, 2023

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 4

CASE OF NIKOGHOSYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA

Doc ref: 4396/21;12858/21;22844/22 • ECHR ID: 001-229422

Document date: December 14, 2023

Cited paragraphs only

FOURTH SECTION

CASE OF NIKOGHOSYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA

(Applications nos. 4396/21 and 2 others –

see appended list)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

14 December 2023

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Nikoghosyan and Others v. Armenia,

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

Faris Vehabović , President , Anja Seibert-Fohr, Anne Louise Bormann , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 23 November 2023,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against Armenia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2. The Armenian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.

THE FACTS

3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

4. The applicants complained of the excessive length of civil proceedings.

THE LAW

5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

6. The applicants complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

7. The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).

8. In the leading case of Fil LLC v. Armenia, no. 18526/13, 31 January 2019, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

9. Having examined all the material submitted to it and having decided to reject the Government’s objection of non-exhaustion (see Fil LLC , cited above, §§ 49-50; Vassilyan and Others v. Armenia [Committee], nos. 20193/15 and 2 others, §§ 7-9, 23 June 2022; and Lmntsyan and Sloyan v. Armenia [Committee] nos. 41973/19 and 51266/19, § 10, 9 February 2023), the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of justifying the overall length of the proceedings at the national level. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement.

10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

11. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Fil LLC, cited above, §§ 62 and 65), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 14 December 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Viktoriya Maradudina Faris Vehabović

Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention

(excessive length of civil proceedings)

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Start of proceedings

End of proceedings

Total length

Levels of jurisdiction

Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage per applicant/household

(in euros) [1]

Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application

(in euros) [2]

4396/21

09/01/2021

Gor NIKOGHOSYAN

1968

Simonyan Liparit

Yerevan

19/12/2011

05/08/2020

8 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 18 day(s)

3 level(s) of jurisdiction

1,800

250

12858/21

25/02/2021

Stella ISAYAN

1958

Simonyan Mariam

Vanadzor

28/12/2016

26/10/2022

5 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 29 day(s)

2 level(s) of jurisdiction

1,500

250

22844/22

28/04/2022

Household

Margo MARGARYAN

1937

Inga GEORGADZE

1972

Khurshudyan Tigran

Yerevan

08/01/2014

29/09/2021

The final judgment was

served on the

applicants on 30/10/2021

7 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 22 day(s)

3 level(s) of jurisdiction

1,200

250

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846